Coraggio Consulting
Loudoun County School Board, Student Services Committee Meeting, Thursday, May 21, 2026

Date: Thursday, May 21, 2026
Place: Loudoun County Public Schools / School Board meeting (see BoardDocs / LCPS-TV)
Length: 56m (video)
Official meeting video (Vimeo / LCPS-TV): https://player.vimeo.com/video/1194510182?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.

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

[00:00:02] all right good afternoon um i call the may 21st 2026 meeting of the student services committee to order i am john pepper i am the chair of this committee and joining me is are my colleagues miss april chandler school board chair of the algonkian district and miss carrie labelle of the catoctin district we will begin our meeting with public comment of which there is none so we

[00:00:37] will move to the approval of the minutes we have two sets of minutes to approve um the minutes of the april 16th 2026 student services committee meeting and the april 23rd 2026 student services work session and I will entertain a motion to approve those minutes miss Chandler I move that we approve the draft minutes for the April 16th 2026 Student Services Committee meeting and the 22 the April 23rd 2026 student services work session there a second Thank You miss LaBelle that motion has

[00:01:17] been made by miss Chandler and seconded by miss LaBelle is there any discussion Seeing none, all of those in favor of approving both the minutes from the April 16th, 2026 Student Services Committee meeting and the April 23rd, 2026 Student Services Committee work session, say aye.

[00:01:36] Aye. That motion has passed unanimously. I want to make a note for those of you who are looking at the agenda for our meeting online that you will see a new item in the agenda. It is item 4.01 under a section called presentation. That is not an item for information, discussion, or action.

[00:01:55] Instead, it is a placeholder so that those individuals who are viewing our meeting can view the same PowerPoint presentation that we are all viewing. You will all be able to see that in future meetings, but we are actually going to skip over that and move to five, which is our action items.

[00:02:11] We have one action item on the agenda tonight. It is revised policy 8250 on bullying prevention and education. do i have a motion for this item miss chandler i move that the student services committee approves revised policy 8250 bullying prevention and education and sends it to the full board as an information item thank you miss chandler is there a second i second thank you miss labelle that motion has been made by miss chandler and seconded by miss labelle is there any discussion

[00:02:46] among committee members i saw i saw you thinking so yes miss chandler okay um thank you chair pepper um i i have some questions um could we discuss the use of the word systemic and chronic and what those definition means and if there is a legal definition or a broadly understood definition i didn't i looked at the virginia code and didn't see anything that clearly stood out

[00:03:25] are those concepts that are clearly understood by um educators and lcps employees yes so good afternoon that definition is from the state and from video e and systemic means is this widespread and then chronic is is it ongoing oftentimes we have students or parents who often use the term bullying when it's really pure conflict or you know just interactions that raise some concerns so we really want to be clear that it has to be something that's happening on an ongoing basis

[00:04:00] That's very helpful, and I appreciate the clarification that those are defined terms that are established by the VDOE. Is it appropriate in that same vein to look at the term ordinary teasing, which is on line 12?

[00:04:18] And what do you mean by looking at that term? Like from teasing or pure conflict? Well, so I'm curious if that is a more subjective term or if it's something that's clearly defined and understood by educators to mean something specific.

[00:04:34] Yes, so we do trainings on bullying prevention and intervention for administrators and our school-based staff and how to respond to them, which does include the difference within the different categories. So could you give me an example of ordinary teasing? I don't want to play with you today.

[00:04:51] You can't sit with me at lunch versus every day someone is being called a name over and over again by the same child. But within the supports that we provide to our educators, that is something that is completely understood and is not subjective.

[00:05:08] Absolutely. Okay, thank you. That's great clarification. And then I was curious, in looking at some of the other policies that relate to bullying in other jurisdictions, I know we changed our language based on suggestions that came in around cyberbullying, And I'm wondering if there's a need to capture the parameters and sort of entertain the idea of do we need to define why we have the ability to discipline students when cyberbullying could occur outside of school?

[00:05:45] I believe we do define that. And our administrators are aware that things outside of the school that impact the regular school day with peers, we do have jurisdiction to then respond and provide interventions as well as discipline.

[00:06:02] Is it typical for us to discipline students when cyberbullying is occurring between students and students who are perhaps in the same spaces during the school day, but the cyberbullying is occurring through devices while students are at home? Yeah, and I think that would be part of the investigation that was done, and it depends on what type of cyberbullying and what that looks like.

[00:06:25] Sometimes there's threats, and then the school has been made aware of that, so we have a response which could result in discipline. But the typical response is an intervention. So if we're made aware by a parent or one of the students in the school, we would start that investigation as soon as possible and inform all the parents that this allegation has been made and provide supports to all parties.

[00:06:48] Thank you. That was really helpful. Ms. LaBelle. I'd like to add that those points that you just brought up, Ms. Chandler, about the bullying, that is all covered in the SBAC policies. defines them it says you know how they're handled so they really are there but the other thing that we do in many of our s back policies and that we've done before in student services is we offer a definition of what the different things are before we you know get into it so i think that

[00:07:24] if we have very clear definitions in the beginning of our policy especially if we're talking about what were the two you had systemic and chronic um that could be helpful and also definition of teasing and it's not just for the teachers it's for parents that tend to look these things up and then bring them back to us through s back saying well you didn't tell us what they were or this wasn't clear or so that might be a good thing to add those particular definitions in there thank you absolutely and one of the things that we do do whenever there's been a report is we send a

[00:08:03] a letter to the parents which is a requirement within 24 hours and within that we include information and resources which help define the difference between teasing peer conflict harassment and also bullying okay so I have a few things and they really came from some of the feedback that our community and some of our groups have put in here the first is on line 86 where it is talking about bullying prevention it's actually now

[00:08:42] it's on 85 but it says bullying prevention intervention programming should include evidence-based curricula practices and strategies just changing the word should to shall seems like it would be more fitting do we need to make a motion to do that as an amendment I think probably you'd probably do so I am going to make a motion to change on 85 the word should to shall do I have a second and miss Chandler has seconded is there any discussion on that all right

[00:09:21] all of those in favor of changing the word of line 85 from should to shall please say hi hi hi miss Chandler do you have a question sorry in sort of looking at the following paragraphs I'm wondering then if we're we do need to follow a consistent pattern so I was I was gonna go through it we can do these

[00:09:48] one at a time so the next location 93 93 and 110 there any others that we scroll down okay so I'm going to make another motion that on lines 93 and 110 the wording should should also be changed to the word shall this would anyone like to second thank you miss Chandler that motion has been properly moved and

[00:10:24] seconded is there any discussion seeing none all in favor of changing those those wordings or should to shall please say aye aye so that motion or that amendment passes unanimously there were a couple of other ones that I did want to make note of and one is on lines 35 and 36 I did the easy ones first on lines 35 and 36 one of our groups has has noted that it's in conflict with lines

[00:11:00] 11 with a definition of lines it's actually 10 and 11 on that bullying is repeated over time or causes severe emotional trauma, and it's inconsistent because on lines 35, we just need to change the definition the other way.

[00:11:24] So on line 34, it's bullying is any unwanted, repeated, written, verbal, or physical behavior, including life-threatening, insulting, or dehumanizing gesture, and take out the part that ending it after the word humiliation on line 37.

[00:11:43] So taking out the part that says and which unreasonably interferes with the school performance or participation of others. I was curious and would love to hear from staff if there's a particular reason why the language is different and if I could get some clarification about how those definitions were pulled in the first place.

[00:12:08] One is from the state and one was LCPS's definition within number two. But I do agree that there is a little bit of a contradiction there because it doesn't have to be repeated if it causes trauma. So we can change that to be consistent.

[00:12:27] So if we remove those last sentences, right? The and which. And the anything beyond and which basically broadens it enough that it encompasses all forms. I believe it broadens it enough that it encompasses all forms of bullets.

[00:12:44] So we have to make a motion on that too, don't we? All right. So I'm going to move, and my computer is jumping around because it needs a restart, but I'm going to move that we eliminate the rest of the sentence on line 37 and line 38, starting with and which, and reads, and which unreasonably interferes with the school performance or participation of others.

[00:13:06] Is there a second? Thank you, Ms. LaBelle. Second. Second. Is there any further discussion among committee members? Seeing none, all those in favor of removing the remainder of line 37, starting with and which on line 38 please say aye aye that passes unanimously the other question I have is right about the same thing it's on going back to line 86 a 7 this is not an amendment but

[00:13:40] it says records it's actually on line 91 now the red line version says records are to be kept and collected and the data analyzed semi-annually who is expected to analyze that data semi-annually so So each of our schools has a bullying prevention coordinator that is appointed by the administrator.

[00:13:59] Typically it is the administrator. So we do collect that data, and we do have that not only with the discipline incidents but also with restorative practices, and we make sure that we are analyzing that data to see the instances that are occurring in our school division.

[00:14:15] Okay. Is it possible to add the line by the bullying prevention coordinator after the word semi-annually? just to ensure that there is actually a person tasked with analyzing this data. The bullying prevention coordination actually falls to central office, and then there's the coordinator.

[00:14:35] So would it make more sense to say at the division level, or would you like it to say something around a coordinator at the school? I don't know if it's at the school level, but I feel like there has to be. So when you say at the division level, right, and I know it will come to your office, and I know you guys are excellent and someone will do it, But I really think it should be tasked to a specific person because of how important this is.

[00:15:01] So maybe we say both, at the school level and division level. Because I don't know that the coordinator is necessarily the one that's going to analyze the data. Because it might be the administrator or it might be a designee. Right. With oversight from central office.

[00:15:19] So at the school level with. Right. So my concern is it gets tasked to someone who isn't there. Right. Or it gets tasked to an administrator and, you know, no one has a specific task on their plate.

[00:15:35] so it kind of just falls by the wayside so I actually would be okay with leaving it as is with the vagueness of it just to ensure that it gets done but with possibly revisiting to ensure that it does get done any other changes suggestions additions subtractions to this policy before we move it to the full board if there is no more discussion we are back to the original

[00:16:13] motion all of those in favor of moving this policy as an information item to the full school board please say aye aye aye that motion has passed unanimously thank you all so we are now going to move on to our information items and we are going to start with information item 6.01 revised policy 8160 exception to school assignment due to attendance zone change and preventing that is this

[00:16:43] Beverly Tate please go ahead thank you so we're bringing this policy to you as the majority of you have sat on appeal hearings for late requests received through policy 8160 which allows for the surveying of families for rezone students at either level I will clarify as I was reading this item and the draft language provided to you and the item I read it differently this so I want to

[00:17:21] clarify that staff is providing some clarifying language specifically utilizing the abbreviation LCPS and further down VHSL when speaking about Loudoun County Public Schools and the Virginia High School League but my clarification even on this is that I we're proposing a time limit to receive late request it's not a time limit for appeals so if I may speak to this item

[00:17:54] and offer that on line 67 run this by miss Richardson before I said this out loud if we create a new item number c3 that would read late request received by staff and then take the added text that's online 71 through 73 late requests received by staff or must be received by staff within 60 calendar days of the school board action granting permission to those students

[00:18:33] whose parents are legal guardians requested an exception through the survey process we want to limit the window with late request similar to policy 8155 that provides a limit for special permission requests there's a cutoff then the new item 4 would be line 68 through 70 as altered staff decisions may be appealed to the school board following procedures of school board policy 2350 appeal to administrative decisions as you're

[00:19:07] aware we have had an excess of 30 late requests that have been appealed to the board we have received others but parents didn't take that additional step this is the first time that our we have been unable to approve from a staff perspective the requests that received because all of the high schools were already at capacity based on policy 8155 so that was our reason for denial as we continue to review attendance zones over the coming years that will not

[00:19:44] necessarily be tied to the opening of new schools there is a possibility that staff would again deny late requests for parents who were initially surveyed but chose not to respond at that time so we're just proposing a 60 calendar day that gives the opportunity if a board were to review survey request in December close for winter break it still gives families two months basically to realize they've missed the survey period but it doesn't continue to receive late

[00:20:21] requests into May and June as schools are trying to schedule schools are staffing so I apologize that I'm not tracking with what was in the item and I've pivoted on you but I'm happy to answer questions specific to this many members do you have questions from this team or anyone else in the committee all right then I will happily answer questions on this so and I just this is really just clarification from my end is what i'm trying to just get wrap my head around all of this

[00:20:57] so right now a survey goes out to any parent who has had their school zone changed based on rezoning and they have a certain amount of time to respond to the survey and if they respond to the survey and they're within all the confines put in place their requests are 100 automatically granted is that correct we survey all families with students who fit in the parameter and then we report back to the school board with those survey responses with the exception of one time that I recall the board has approved those but it's not an

[00:21:36] automatic necessarily it is automatic for rising seniors it's written in policy that they do not have to change but rising juniors are surveyed we survey those the board with the Dulles South actually requested that we survey all the rising sophomores and rising juniors which wasn't part policy so they're not automatically approved no sir but we do report to the board for their action and I remember we did something with Madison's Trust I believe at one of the board meetings recently that was the same situation okay and then if they admit if parents for whatever reason or families for whatever

[00:22:11] reason have missed that window and this is kind of what we've sat on then they can appeal individually through policy 2350 to get a hearing in front of the board for approval is that correct that is correct if staff denies the request and there is no time limit currently on that no sir okay only concern I would have on all of this is just to make sure that we that if a family does not return a survey that we are working to contact them in some way just to do that

[00:22:49] laugh if we're gonna put a time frame on it because I will tell you I think we got an email yesterday from a family as a whole board that missed the window or at least I did um and it seemed very late and I was like this seems incredibly late just to make sure that we just do like one more round of like hey we didn't get something from you guys um is it are you sure you're comfortable with your choice that your student is now going to attend school y instead of their current school x yes sir we can certainly do that um in our survey process which typically

[00:23:26] runs a few weeks at least sometimes a month we send reminder emails each week we have recognized there were some hiccups this past fall with hotmail email addresses so we're working through that but yes sir we can certainly do that and we have said in the survey if you intend for your student to proceed to the school that will serve your residents you do not have to respond because but we will endeavor to be more more outreach I appreciate that because I think that's kind of where the big and it's not 2002 who's still using hot

[00:24:05] mail I might have a hotmail account but but yes I still have an ancient hotmail account that I might use for junkers fan but I appreciate the follow-up because I think the biggest thing is just making sure everyone has a chance to to to raise awareness and despite glitches and I appreciate you guys looking into it so so thank you for this and are we okay with this coming back to the committee as an action item yes excellent and we will do the public outreach community as part of the process and then thank you so much mistake all right moving on to

[00:24:43] our next and last information item it's item 6.02 revised policy 5340 safe and supportive removal of students this has also gone through several work sessions and with that miss Richardson it is the floor is yours thank you and good afternoon. So as a reminder, we have had two scheduled work sessions, the first being on March 25th, the second being on April 23rd in collaboration with representation from our board advisory groups. So we had SEAC, MSAC, GIAC, and LEAF representation at our work sessions.

[00:25:20] So from the first work session, you will recall we divided the policy into sections. So we did the first four sections in March and some of the observations were let's focus on clarity let's be consistent with language throughout let's make sure we emphasize the need for de-escalation strategies first the policy language was feeling a little punitive more like discipline then the impact really wanted to be clear on documentation and transparency in reporting to families working to really build a shared understanding there work in some

[00:26:00] concerns about misuse or overuse of a safe and supportive removal and then of course the consistency and implementation some of the recommendations coming out of the first work session on the first four sections of the policy were to clarify the criteria for use again documentation and monitoring making sure that we provided additional clarity on the prohibited practices and then when it came time for us to do professional learning should this policy be approved making sure that it was scenario based and making sure that our staff members and administrators get a chance to really

[00:26:39] kind of role play and work through some of the scenarios that they might encounter in our april work session we got a lot more information back and so i'll just highlight so observations the key terms were still not consistently defined throughout the policy roles and responsibilities needed to be clarified we talked about timelines the requirements for documentation and meetings and also you know make making sure that the policy provided clarity on what the expectations were for re-entry

[00:27:15] back into the classroom or or educational setting in which the student had been removed and then also making sure that we work on defining accountability the impact we wanted to make sure that we were filing these documents correctly that we provided clarity on really who is the owner of these documents and how are they going to be maintained access to this information making sure that we are monitoring the amount of instructional

[00:27:47] time that students are missing. Some feedback was that the processes could be subjective and so that could increase the possibility for distrust, some fractured relationships between schools and families. And then certainly there it was recognized by our work session participants that this is going to be a heavy lift on staff and administrators with the documentation process. So some of the recommendations coming out we're just making sure that we tighten up that

[00:28:22] documentation process as much as we can so that it is accurately indicating the supports that we need to provide to that student but then also making it a user-friendly format for our staff members make sure that we're adding those clear those clear qualifiers that we're defining those responsibilities and timelines that we're providing clarity and our operational processes and that Again, we focus on that re-entry criteria so that students are not removed from the setting longer than what they need be.

[00:28:56] So you will see that we have completely overhauled the language in our policy. So there was lots of feedback from our tabletop groups that that first paragraph, that purpose, really had more of a negative tone.

[00:29:16] So staff have definitely tried to focus more on dignity, safety, and well-being, and not so much on that behavioral impact as it's taking place. And so in your documents, you should see the draft of the policy before our work sessions, and then what's in our slides is the outcome of our work sessions.

[00:29:40] You can see for definitions, we did remove isolation and exclusion, and we did also add a definition for trained staff. There was lots of feedback on, so what does a staff member mean? What does that mean?

[00:29:57] Is it a substitute? Is it a parent volunteer? And so we have provided a definition for what trained staff are. Under conditions for use, we have added additional language and focus on de-escalation and strategies to support students with self-regulation before the implementation of a safe and supportive removal to a designated supportive area.

[00:30:29] Expectations for professional learning, we flip-flopped some of the sections of the policy. There was lots of feedback on it's not quite flowing correctly. So for the professional learning for staff, expectations have been defined there.

[00:30:46] We've also maintained that parent notification piece, and we also provided some clarity. There was lots of feedback on if a student is already eligible under the IDEA or ADA, and their educational planning teams have determined that some type of removal or support with self-regulation is required, and the parent has signed for consent to implementation, that notification is not necessarily required in those instances.

[00:31:17] So we have captured that feedback. The documentation requirements, of course, date, time, duration, reason for action, the description of the events leading up to. There was a lot of focus on are we really being thoughtful about the aspects of what is happening prior us having to remove a student from that setting and so in our documentation we're making sure that there is a spot for that to be clearly outlined so that when we have our meeting to debrief and process we're able to go to go back and

[00:31:54] sort of really look at antecedents behavior and then that consequence and how might we change some of those antecedents for this particular student supervision and support of the student has remained somewhat the same review and monitoring and then of course we kept the accountability aspect thank you miss Richardson committee members any questions comments mr. Chandler let's see at line I really wanted to say first and foremost that I

[00:32:32] love this process and I found it incredibly helpful to work through this very important policy in committee with important members of our community who have a vested interest in this process and it was just really great I mean I know it's a lot of effort from the team and right it was fun I think it was just a really great way to write policy and I enjoyed it and I'm very happy to share that I do believe based on the conversations that we had in the

[00:33:07] committee that there was some concern about the 24-hour notification period that's on line 62 and I was just curious how that decision was made not to be by the end of the school day so staff really had to weigh what is feasible and practical like in the scope of a school day and so this really aligns with the same reporting requirement that we have for policy 5345 restraint and seclusion of students

[00:33:41] and so while every effort absolutely can be made to notify by the end of the school day we at least have given ourselves the opportunity for other things that may pop up throughout the course of a school day and given ourselves that 24 hours I guess the only hesitation that I have and I know it's a lot to ask from staff but as a parent when you have the opportunity to correct behavior having the ability to do it while it's still fresh in the

[00:34:15] child's mind is such a powerful tool so I guess that's I appreciate having the opportunity to reflect on staff's position but that is something that I'll be mulling over okay we certainly and staff are happy to go back and sort of relook at that section it could be something to the effect of you know reporting by the end of the school day is preferred but in no more than 24 hours right we could possibly frame things that way I will tell you that part of the outcome of the feedback from our work sessions is that we have also

[00:34:53] drafted a regulation but of course the regulation won't be finalized until the policy is finalized but really that implementation piece so we could also reiterate that expectation within the regulation once we solidify the policy if my committee members are amenable to that suggestion I would appreciate that clarification and policy I think it's a good compromise it still leaves room for the times when it's not possible but it sets a reasonable so I will piggyback off of that just for a second miss Chandler and I would also like the something on lines of by the end of the school day we're feasible but no later

[00:35:32] than 24 hours I think that's a perfect perfect sentence or segue Miss LaBelle thank you sometimes I can word Smith Miss Chandler anything else Miss LaBelle anything okay so thank you guys and I'm also gonna oh wait oh Miss Taylor does have one more so in sort of looking through all of the changes I did notice a

[00:36:02] question that came up and I was curious when students are removed in what ways do we ensure that they're able to catch up on the actual educational content that they miss right so we did not capture that aspect in policy but we did capture it in the draft regulation because that really goes into more of that implementation so making sure that either it's gathering of the materials it's affording the student time it's making sure that we're

[00:36:36] communicating to families here is what little johnny missed and here's how i would like to make sure that I catch up with him on what was missed. So that has been laid out more in regulation. But I could certainly, we could look at referencing something in policy and then just know that it's expanded upon in the draft regulation.

[00:37:00] I'm sure if it's called out in regulation that I would be comfortable. I just would really, I think it could be valuable if we could discuss it in committee and then at least it would be, not that I want to approve the regulation, but just to have that contextualization for the community so that there's an awareness and where to go to look.

[00:37:21] Absolutely. That was our plan. Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Ms. Chandler. And so I'll jump in again, and I do want to thank you and echo the comments of my colleagues here. I thought that this process was really wonderful. A lot of times we don't quite get to see how the sausage is made when it comes to policy, and this was a really good chance to kind of see how all the pieces come together to build a coherent policy.

[00:37:44] think that you did a really good job as a team to take a lot of the suggestions from all the work groups and put together a really nice policy the one thing I will have and I know this may be in regulation too was I'll know a lot of the time we talked about a simplifying this through some sort of reporting or form and wondering if that was something that your team was also working towards the form is connected to the draft regulation so something would echo my colleague sentiment that we would love to see the regulate you okay we'd love to see the sentiment um something just i know that you have to do one before the other

[00:38:20] but it's nice to kind of put them together so that everything can be in context so i really would appreciate that and i i do thank you and i'm sure that as i digest this a little more we bring this up for action assuming we're ready to go with action and i think that everyone is um we may have a few little changes or tweaks here and there as we go into our june meeting so if there's no objection i'm happy to put this on for action at our june student services committee meeting and With that, we are going to go to item seven, which is a discussion item on revised policy 8155, which is now called out-of-zone transfers.

[00:39:00] And I had asked this to be put on as a discussion item. And Mr. Dolson, do you have a few things you'd like to start with? No, Chair Pepper, just the bullets, the bulleted list up here is just a highlight of what we have done with, in regards to the current policy, 8155, and its possible shift to the namesake of out-of-zone transfers.

[00:39:25] Currently, it is still the school assignment policy, just so everyone is aware. But if we, if the committee voted to take this to the board, it would be considered as the new title out-of-zone school transfer. So the only item that I don't think we discussed in detail last time is the last bullet where my colleagues and I were looking and we just wanted to make sure that we did still have the opportunity for school administration, principals namely, to have a process to rescind a transfer should it be necessary.

[00:40:02] And we can certainly, you know, I can certainly answer any questions as to why that might be necessary. It was already in the policy. There was a process for it. We definitely see the process going the same way if that needed to be considered.

[00:40:19] So there's really no change. But we noticed that it may have been not included in the red line. I was looking at it, and it looks like it still made it. But I'll be honest with you, this policy has been through so many iterations. There's red.

[00:40:35] There's yellow. There's green. There's the rainbow in this policy right now. all of the different versions. I just wanted to make sure that we did mention that that was something that we ensured that it was added back in. So I think part of the reason why I asked for this to come back as a discussion is that it's a 12-page policy. It's just, there's a lot of meat to it, but I also know that we are under, as a board, really, I want to say a time crunch, but time constraints to get this policy out because we really need to have this in

[00:41:10] kind of the early autumn as we start to plan for what would be I hate to say 27 the 27 28 school year this time seemed like it's going so fast and so with that we had also possibly considered the idea of doing work sessions on this policy my personal opinion often you see my opinion first is I don't think that is something that would be beneficial to this policy so I think that we might keep this within the confines of the committee and perhaps the full board I do know that some of our board affiliated groups particularly SIAC has

[00:41:47] come to me within the last little bit of time noting that they really would like a little bit of time to review some of the things in this revised policy and I do want to grant them that time but I think and this is my opinion and I'm when I also want to hear from my fellow committee members I think that we're in a place where we could possibly bring this back as either information or at our June meeting do it as action in our August meeting and then have it ready in

[00:42:23] September for the full school board which would allow some of our school affiliated groups to have time miss Chandler my concern I really don't want to delay dealing with this policy but I do think it's important for us to make sure that we have feedback and my concern would be that see act doesn't meet again until September is that the case so ultimately they would not be able to provide us in their normal process feedback until September miss LaBelle I have a question for mr. Richardson is it not true that our

[00:43:01] special ed students are considered for placement on a completely different policy they're not really covered by this if I'm correct so for our students that are eligible under the IDEA that access specialized programs they are placed separate and apart from this policy we look at several other factors for students in specialized programs so it is primarily a policy that is accessed by general education students, cross-CAT students eligible under the IDEA, and from time to time we do have some specialized program students

[00:43:40] whose families choose this process, but we flag that very quickly, and then we still sort of pull them out and work with them in that separate and apart process through the Office of Special Education, because we really are looking at learner profiles when we're establishing our specialized programs so but we work with each and every family for student placements thank you I'm gonna circle back and I'm going to ask a question to my colleague in the committee and I'm gonna ask you all a question but I'm gonna start with Miss Chandler as someone who sets the

[00:44:20] agenda for our school board meetings do you feel as if we allowed time for see Yeah, and I do also agree that SEAC feedback is vitally important to this policy. I'd also like to hear from MSAC as well and some of our other affiliated groups. Do you feel that a time frame where we have – so if they're meeting in October, they would meet before this meeting.

[00:44:42] September, sorry. You're right. If they would meet before this meeting and we would be able to do this as an action item in September and bring it to the full board in October, do you feel that it is doable? Of course it's always doable. And truly, I can't necessarily project out what's going to be on the agenda in October from my seat here in May.

[00:45:08] But really, I would be ready to dive into this, but it does feel important to me to make sure that we get feedback from the committee. And, you know, I hear, Ms. LaBelle, what you're saying, that there are other paths forward for students that are in the special education community, but it doesn't cover everyone so i'd hate to miss out on the opportunity for feedback and i know that's an ongoing conversation that's been occurring um in terms of that friction between our schedules and their schedules um and i i would like to respect that i guess i would then

[00:45:46] also want to hear from staff if that pushes your timeline too close to be ready for i mean i really feel like we have an obligation not to delay, but also to make sure that we build in enough time to communicate the significant change to the community. It is a significant change.

[00:46:11] So, Ms. Chandler, if I may, delaying this, I think, is the catalyst for us not to be able to communicate to the community in a timely manner. When we talk about October, we're really talking about the end of the first quarter so a quarter of our school year has already been is gone my fear is that it will continue and then we will be back in a situation where we are making a decision in November up against a December deadline and we're we really haven't we're back to where we were for

[00:46:47] the past two years so if I just may offer a professional opinion I think delaying this is exactly counter to what you just said which is making a decision we can certainly have conversations about how the decision may be positively or negatively impacting students and families based on this new policy because that's that's just the way policy works right we don't know until we try to implement it but my my true fear is if we delay this we are going to be right back where we were for the 24 25 school year and the 25 26 school

[00:47:25] year and staff and i'm going to lean into to to miss tate we were really up against a deadline that was we had to back things up because of a late decision that was made in december december 16th i think actually um so i'm just using that as an example um i respect what you all are trying to do i think having all of the input is is very important um i think and i'm also going to say that we certainly can take that that feedback and as staff do with it what we

[00:48:00] can but I I really appreciate your your comment and I also just want to share that I think it's it's a given take but it's also counter I think the communication piece is so important and at least families and and students but mainly families would have would have the knowledge of what is forthcoming as soon as possible whereas if we wait we're going to be delaying that and it's going to be kind of we're changing the rules in the middle of the game if you will so I'm theoretically so I appreciate the friction that exists in

[00:48:38] this situation and the timing that we're currently experiencing right I do want to make sure that we give enough time to communicate to families when we're making this significant change that said none of our parent advisory committees will be meeting over the summer so we wouldn't necessarily be able to solicit that feedback from any of the parties I mean that normally participate in the feedback process theoretically if men this is typical for our process right if

[00:49:11] we had an information item in August there is potential that we could receive feedback in that period before our meeting in September our meeting in September mid-September be the end of September like third week of September so it really wouldn't go to the board for information until we're talking end of

[00:49:36] October and knowing that this policy would probably elicit a lot of feedback from our community in terms of public comment perhaps just we've been down this road in different ways before and I would not want to get to an end result and then be accused of not accepting feedback can I ask I'm gonna ask a

[00:50:13] question then mr. Bell I know you had something that you wanted to add ideally what would be the in order to properly in our feeling communicate this with the community what would be the ideal date that this policy would be approved in your in your estimation I mean today obviously but so I mean yeah or last

[00:50:46] last month yeah but I think optimally end of September I think as a former as a former high school principal I would like to be able to communicate and be able and be educated in what this process is going to look like for not not only you know my my current students but incoming students staffing is a whole nother piece of this puzzle for current administrators to be then be able to communicate you know what this is going to look like and how it's going

[00:51:23] to impact staffing that's always a huge chunk of this but I think end of September would be optimally for us to be able to then communicate over and over and over again because we work with our the Department of Communication and Family Engagement on all of the dates and how you get to the you know the application process all of that is is is a process in and of itself so that's not our committee that's full board at the end of it yeah I mean that would be

[00:51:56] ideal miss LaBelle sorry thank you mr. chairman I would like to point out first of all that I have been on the Student Services Committee dealing with this from the very start. We have provided so many hours, extra work sessions coming up with everything that we've done. We have had input from all of these communities all along the way. We

[00:52:28] have had multiple days when we've had many, many parent comments on this. At this point in time. This is pretty much what we had come up with the last round we had. It's just been clarified in words. In other words, we talked about what was going to be appropriate education for students. We talked about other ways that they could be dealt with. All the reasons

[00:53:02] that you would do it and all the reasons you wouldn't do it. This hasn't changed very much at all in a year and a half, to be perfectly honest. All these groups that we're talking about today have already sent in what they think about this.

[00:53:23] It's not like we surprised anybody by bringing this up right now. It's been out there in the Ethernet, and we have people that were here. Because it's here, it's time to stop kicking the can down the road. We need to get this done and move on, and I really feel that that's important because the community needs to know what's coming and deal with it.

[00:53:47] Okay, so here's going to be my proposal. Let me see if we're all on board with this, okay? We are currently in May. We have one more meeting in June. I would like to see this come back as information in June for action in August and to the full board in September. Does that work for everyone's timeline?

[00:54:05] Knowing that we have about, that will give us some time to share this with our advisory groups. I know it's not the preferred method, right? It's not, they're not going to have a whole meeting. But it will give individuals, at least connected to those groups, a chance to provide feedback.

[00:54:27] Is that something that we can be amenable to? It's fine if you say no, it's okay. The agenda in committee is your purview.

[00:54:46] If it would be helpful, it's important for board members to know that as a staff member, especially as one that serves as a liaison to a board advisory, we are tasked at the end of each year in preparation for the upcoming year to meet with the leadership of that advisory.

[00:55:05] Usually it happens in June, right, as we're wrapping up and gearing up. We look at the policies across the different categories. Here's what we anticipate. So we could certainly make sure that the other staff liaisons to advisories know the proposed timeframe for this particular policy so we can share this information with our advisory committees.

[00:55:28] So what I'm going to suggest is I'm going to stick to that timeline. June, August, hopefully get through to September so that we can approve it as a full board and you can have the time because what we're proposing really does need to be communicated to the public at large, okay? And that's my fear on this one.

[00:55:45] But with the caveat that we let our advisory committees as well as the other ones know this is coming, this is the timeline, and why this is the timeline, right?

[00:56:02] The timeline, because of the significant changes that are occurring, we need the time to communicate this to the public at large. So that's where I'm going to go with this, and we will see how it plays out. And I thank you guys for being so accommodating.

[00:56:20] think this is this is a good discussion to have I think this is kind of where I wanted to go with this today because I really need to know your timeline I need to know really everyone's timeline if we're gonna if we're gonna do something like this okay the next item is item eight new business committee members is there any new business okay seeing none I will now adjourn the May 21st 2026 student services committee meeting we will see you in June

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