001What are we calling it? Special meeting study session? Wednesday, October 29th, 2025. It is 6.02 p.m. Let's open with the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. and to the republic for which it stands. One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. a Texas Longhorn Cup in your own? That doesn't mean that you didn't leave it in there. Did you miss one second. Well, I have an update I wanted to provide to everyone. There was… Microphones? Yes. new microphones installed. that pick up everything, even whispers. So I wanted to make you aware of that. So we can push these back. No, you actually still need to use these. Because it helps to pick up for the closed captioning. And we want to make sure
002that people who are watching are able to hear and understand everything that's being said at the meeting. Just want you to know that there's new microphones. Okay, thanks for that, Warren. Can we get roll call, please, Monica? Trustee Coleman? Here. Trustee Sharp? Here, twisting cheek? Trustee Cohen-Thompson? Here. Trustee Dean? Trustee Dunn? Here. Trustee LaValle? Here. Can we entertain a motion for approval and adoption of the agenda? So moved. Second. It's been moved by Trustee Sharp, seconded by Trustee Cohen-Thompson. We're gonna roll call notes, please. Trustee Cheek? Colin Thompson? Yes. Trustee Dean? Trustee Dunn? Yes. Trustee Lovell? Yes. Trustee Sharp? Yes. Trustee Coleman? Yes. Are there any comments from the community? No comments from the community. An update regarding a lead request for new construction preliminary. Apportionment? And Dr. Barr. Okay, well, I wanted to give…
003I will say, Trustee Dean just walked in the room. So I wanted to provide… the trustees with an update. There'll be a request from Elite. to the Vallec City Unified School District regarding. application for funding. The Office of Public School Construction under the Charter School Facilities Program. And on Wednesday… October 15th? There was a regular board meeting that was held. And during that. Board meeting, part of the agenda. less consideration. for Elite's request for this funding, for the forms needed. To apply for the funding? The board? listened to… information from the administration. who did not recommend that they move forward with the request. And that particular agenda item. there was not a motion made, and so it… was stopped at that meeting. On Thursday the 16th, the very next day, Elite. Had staff, students, and
004parents. that came to this building, the main office. requested a meeting with me. And was offered a meeting for the following Thursday. That was October 23rd in the morning. Dr. Bishop, a parent and a student, attended that meeting with me. And Monica was there as well. And… they had an opportunity to present to me any information that they wanted to share. They gave a lot of history for me. They also gave me their perspective of how the board meeting went. I had also watched the board meeting. And there were two requests. that Dr. Bishop was making. The first was that. Acknowledgement be made. that Elite had actually paid for repairs on the roof. And there was a request. to meet with. Superintendent Aurelio to talk about. the forms that they needed in order to apply
005for this state funding. I concluded that meeting. With just those two requests. and the history, I was able to follow up with. Superintendent Aurelio. who stated to me that he had actually had a meeting. with Dr. Bishop. It leads staff, and I don't believe any students were there at that time. two days prior, so that meeting had already taken place. And he also said that he had not received any receipts or any information about the roof. So, as far as back available, I'm sorry, SART is… As far as Vallejo is concerned. They had not received any information. So I did forward a letter. to Dr. Bishop. to let her know that I had investigated that, communicated, and that she was offered an opportunity to provide. to Jess Baines Wright. Then to the board, information about
006what she had done in terms of repairing the roof. Any receipts or any information that she would want to share. And then also, I acknowledge that there had been a meeting. between herself and the superintendent. Two days prior to our meeting. And that was the end of my communication with her. I have not heard whether or not. they were moving forward with a special board meeting. I heard that that was not going to take place, but I don't know if that has been scheduled. And I don't have any other information to share at this time. I have a couple questions. Trustee Dean? So, um, when they met with you. But when they… I understand they came. I saw the press release, um… When they met with you, they were meeting with you in your capacity
007as… administ… what? In what capacity? Were they meeting with you because… We're their authorizer. For… and so… and then, the next… What follows is… what capacity were you operating in? When you reached out to Sovaleo. Superintendent. Superintendent to superintendent. Superintendent, so they just reached out to you as a superintendent? Yes, and from what I understand, they reached out to other elected officials? as their role as an elected official. Okay, so in looking at the expenditures. related to the roof, it feels like that's something that. we would have potential access to. So, I'm a, um… I'm just… I'm curious about our particular role in this matter. Also, because not deciding is a decision. It could, in fact, be, um, subject, in my view, could be subject to. Some form of appeal, or red, or some such
008thing in which we might have a role. So, um, I'm just… I think… it feels like this should be explored a little bit more. I'm happy to chime in right now, if that's okay with you, Dr. Parr. Um, so, I think there's, like, two buckets of what I'm hearing from you, Dana, Trustee Dean, is… One adds to the funding and application piece of it, and then separately. which is part of that, but also just the root piece and, like, what the concerns from an oversight perspective and occur there, so… As to the first bucket, um… basically what Elite has done is they've applied for funding through the Office of Public School Construction as part of the charter school program. And there's numerous regulations on point, and so really, what a charter school… so I'm just
009going to speak generally… what a charter school is required to do when they want to apply for that funding is they have to notify the school district in which they are physically located. So it is not a matter of authorization, who the authorizer is, this is strictly a matter of where they are physically located. And then that school district, which most oftentimes is obviously the authorizer, but when we're dealing with a county board authorizer, that's where we get into the authorizers outside of this, and it's the school district. Um, the school district must… basically fill out these various forms and… I will not bore you with all the details. Fill out these various forms and adopt a resolution. memorializing all that information that is required, that the charter school then provides that application. which includes
010the resolution from the board, in which. the Board of the school district when they are physically located. So that resolution is what. Volio City Unified School District not approved. So therefore, the league cannot. I mean, they could, in theory. provide their application, it just won't have various components that are required under there. So that whole issue is really a matter between. The school district to which the charter school is physically located, and this charter school, similar to Prop 39 facilities. Um, if anyone's familiar with Prop 39 facilities… That's what Elite is, is on a Prop 39 facility. Exactly, so the obligations for Prop 39 facilities basically. providing, you know, reasonably comprehensive facilities to a charter school falls within the school district in which they are physically located, again, here at Salah City. So it's not
011a school, county board of education. It doesn't fall within your jurisdiction as an oversight authority. So if there is any dispute between. The school district in which they're physically located, and they charter school, and the school district which they are physically located happens not to be the authorizer. It is… it is a dispute between those two agencies, and so whatever the mechanisms for appealing or disputing it would be between the two of those. If the authorizer gets involved in that, you're kind of opening the door to involving yourself in a matter of which you are not. falling within, which then could create some exposure or liability if you do get an… not you, but if a board were to get involved into that particular subject. Now, obviously, as the authorizer, you want to be aware
012of what's going on. You should be apprised about what's going on, because. whether an application for funding is granted or denied, that obviously has financial implications for the charter school, of which you have. oversight authority to ensure that they are fiscally sound, and so on and so forth. So, as a. county board, you would be responsible for understanding what's going on, but not responsible for the decision-making authority or any sort of appeal that comes out of that. So, does that address the first bucket? It helps, but just to… if I could… Ask a clarifying question. So then, to the extent that the county superintendent of schools. is communicating with one of the parties with information from another party. She's doing so as the super county superintendent of schools, very specifically not. as the, um… I
013forget what we call it, administrator of the… the authorizers. Yeah, and I don't… that's an important distinction in my mind, is that correct? Yeah, and I don't want to, uh… paraphrase, because I know it wasn't present at the meeting, but I do think that there was an acknowledgement during that meeting, if you want to share that. Yes, at the very beginning of the meeting that we… did not have jurisdiction in that particular case. As an oversight authority. Yes. And then to the roof piece of it, obviously, to the extent there's concerns, and I don't know the facts here, so… but if there's no roof, a roof, roof needs repair, whatever it is, if that's information as a, you know, authorizer that you would like, I think. the Beckman-Best mechanism for finding that information would be
014through. Chas, who is the contact, and the monthly meetings, kind of inquiring in that… in that meeting. Hey, can you give us more information about that? And that's information that can be reported to the board as part of the charter school update, separate and apart from the school funding piece of it, would be my recommendation. Got it. Okay, very helpful, thank you. And then, uh, Trustee Coleman, basically that's a landlord tenure. You know what? I should have just raised it that way. Thank you, Jessica Venuo and Thompson. Much better phrased. Any other questions? That was very helpful. Thank you. Okay. The Brown Act update. Outside legal counsel will facilitate a study session presentation and discussion regarding updates to the Brown Act, including Senate Bill 707 and recent litigation. Okay, well, thank you, Trustees and Dr.
015Parr. Um, I will start this presentation by saying I agree with you, Trustee Dean. It's not actually… it's not… there's not a lot here, so we'll go over, um, the changes, and if you have any questions, let me know, but I think that at first, it sounded like this was going to be a big overhaul with a lot of significance. impacts. There's truly not, so… Some people think it is. Oh, well… My characterization… I mean, well, I guess if we just go to… and I think Amanda's gonna be… Right, thank you. Um… If we go to the next slide. Okay, so I think why there's a perception that there's a significant change is because there are some significant changes, but it only is impacting a smaller subset of legislative bodies. Um, there are some other
016changes that we'll go over that are impacting all legislative bodies, your board included. Um, but there's this term that's being used as eligible legislative body. And so the most significant changes are actually impacting those, quote, eligible legislative bodies. Which are defined as these four groups. One, a city council of a city with a population of 30,000 or more. a board of supervisors of the county, city. and county with a population of 30,000 or more, a city council, a city located in a county with a population of 600,000 or more. And then finally, a board of directors at large special districts meeting certain thresholds based on boundary areas, and so on and so forth. So, as you can see, you know, your body is not included in this definition. For the sake of thoroughness, I will
017high-level kind of explain those significant ones, because you are, you know. Collect officers, and there are other agencies that you may attend, or may be familiar with. And so, if we go to the next slide… I think this is probably the most significant change, but it's also not that significant in of itself, is that. effective July 1st of 2026, those eligible legislative bodies. must, and they were required to have all of their board meetings and permitting attendance from members of the public via. basically teleconferencing, some sort of two-way connection. Currently, if you do do it, if a board does do it, then they must make it available to members of the public, right? It's not a requirement. I know you all can just do that as a matter of practice, but there are. smaller agencies
018and so on and so forth that only offer that if they're having members of the board attending. be in the teleconferencing requirements, so that could be a significant change for certain agencies, probably not that significant, because I imagine those ones are already doing that. Um, there's some changes about requiring the eligible legislative body to make good faith attempts to restore service when there are disruptions. to telephonic or internet services during meetings. This is something I think agencies are already doing anyway, so that's not super significant. Um, there's some requirements about taking certain actions to encourage residents to participate in public meetings and sort of, sort of. outreach, um, and then the final one, and I actually think this one is pretty impactful. Um, is that same effective date, July 1st of 2026, so there's some
019time for these agencies. They are required for all of their agendas to be translated into the most commonly spoken languages according to the data. Um, from the American Community Survey, so all of their agendas must be posted, and there's some specific language in the government code about what those languages are. It's like a 20%. threshold, I think something like that. So that is, that is actually a significant one, because there's sort of more administrative tasks associated with that. Any questions on those? Okay, so, next one. So the teleconferencing, there's… I actually have 7 of 7 printed out. Just because I'm a hard copy. It's 23 pages, which makes it seem like there's a lot. A lot of the changes impacting all agencies for teleconferencing was just moving. some of the provisions to new edu- new
020government codes, and so they're moving from one place to another. So there's really not actually a lot of significant changes. Um, one of the changes that is significant, though, is that the. current teleconferencing, so not the traditional teleconferencing rules that have. always been in place under the Brown Act, but the newer ones, um, post-COVID that went into place, those are being extended again. through January 1st of 2030, so there's exceptions for Just Cause and Emergency. all those provisions are going to be extended again. I think we're probably going to keep seeing that. to be extended. We've seen that a couple of times. So all those provisions will still. be available to you through January 1st of 2020. 20, 30. Um… And then this… it broadened the definition of just cause to include physical or family
021emergency, which was actually in a prior definition, and then it came out, and now it's back in as a definition of just cause, so… Um, it's incorporating… if you have a physical or family emergency, that would constitute just cause, and for your agency, you can use that, I think, 7 times in a year. Um, this one is actually the law, I mean. kind of already, but allowing remote attendance as an accommodation, so if there is a, you know, a physical accommodation that is required under the ADA. And allowing remote attendance for board members or agency elected officials to attend remotely because of an accommodation due to a disability. And then… disruption, so it extends the provisions. There's been some changes in the last couple of years regarding when you can remove an individual from a
022meeting. for causing disruption. It's essentially extended those provisions, so you can now still use all of those provisions, which I'm sure you're pretty privy to in terms of the. If there's an individual who is disrupting and they meet a certain threshold, you can remove them. Um, which is separate and apart from clearing the room, ordering the room to be cleared. Again, the next one on the next slide, copies of the Brown Act, the way the law is currently written, it says. that agencies can require that copies of the Brown Act be provided to all. board members that are newly elected, and now it's saying that all board members that are newly elected must be. Given him probably the wrong act. Pretty straightforward. Um, the public commons line, I actually want to read this. I don't
023think it's going to impact your agency necessarily. Um, but existing law requires, as you know, for there to be an opportunity for members of the public. to directly address the legislative body. And it specifies that there are certain. you're not required to provide an opportunity for members of the public to address. the legislative body on an item that's already been considered by a committee. I accepted that item has been substantially changed since the committee heard the item, as determined by the legislative body. The bill is extending the exceptions. to those committees whose primary subject matter jurisdiction focuses on elections, budget. So if you have a budget committee, it could apply there. police oversight, not applicable privacy. We're moving from or restricting access to materials available in public libraries, or taxes, or related spending proposals. So
024those are, um, those are added to the exceptions for when you. cannot require, or when you don't have to take public comment on those things. Again, it's a really nuanced thing, and I don't even know if you've all ever exercised that. option to begin with, I think you're pretty open to hearing from folks. Uh, okay, and finally… Um, as you all know, probably during one of your Brown Act trainings. There's, um… there's a rule permitting. that board members can engage in separate conversations on social media platforms with members of the public outside of a traditional board meeting, so long as you do not interact with a quorum of each other. Um, and so this is just extending that… permission indefinitely. So saying you can continue to, you know, engage with folks online, um, so long
025as you are not communicating with. each other. Questions on that? Trustee Fuent? So, we'll be on social media. And it's 50 other people. And you're one of the 50. When they say, of a 7… We're of 7 of the 50, or 3 of the 50. How does that work? I mean, so in Brown Act trainings that I give, I always just say, yes, there's a law that says, as a matter of practice, like, you can, for example, respond to questions right within, like, yes, our board meeting is coming up, things like that. But I just, as a general matter, I don't recommend engaging with folks on social media, just as a practice. I don't. Yeah, no, no. Yeah. …that if it's social media. and 2 or 3 of the board, or three, at least 3
026of the board. are among those 50 that's… chatting, Will. And then that's where the problems arise, right? You have somebody lagging, right? You have one more member liking something else, and even if that of itself, I would never. recommend. I don't do it. Yeah, no, no, no, no, exactly. So I think this is just the nuance of saying it's extended, but they're… again, it's… what it's trying to show is in today's day and age, right, like, you're inevitably going to be on social media, and you might be, you know, corresponding with members of the public on something, and not realizing that, you know. somebody else chimed in because of the nature of it. Yeah, you don't know that, so… I always just say, just don't do it, um, just don't do it. Because the nuances
027there are, you know, unintended consequences of that. can be very problematic. Trustee Dean? Um, is there a distinction with regard to… Um, excuse me. matters that are within the jurisdiction of the body that you sit on, and or… a particular item. For a particular issue that's coming up. Versus just, like, you know… Um, well, maybe something that's going on at the county… oh, the Board of Soups. It matters within the jurisdiction of the body, yeah, so that's the restriction. matters within, so if you're talking about. There's a lot right now, in today's political climate, so I don't want to say anything specifically, but yeah, if you're commenting on something outside of your jurisdiction, and someone else chimes in, that's fine. Again, I would always just make sure, like, the appearance of impropriety is always, like,
028at top of mind, is, like, could this potentially. Could there be somebody out there that believes this somehow relates to something? Oh, you have passed a resolution 5 years ago saying you stand with, you know, whatever it is, so just… Always be cautious, particularly with everything we've got going on these days. And then, in follow-up to that, is there a distinction… so we have… we're a seven-member body. So, you know, we can have two brown-act buddies. on a particular item that comes… is gonna… we expect to come before us. Do you, as someone who looks into these things. Do you feel like that's… something to think about in this arena. So… For example, if one or more of us is watching what might be happening at the library foundation luncheon from 11 to 4 on
029Sunday. Um, and two of us are talking about that online. Let's pretend that was going to come before us. And do you… is it your advice that we watch for that third, and really the fourth? For some kind of daisy chain effect? Yeah, no, I definitely would watch for that. Um, I would also… say… In this hypothetical, is it this… just those two board members, or is it in a more global, sort of. something where there's multiple numbers, right? Yeah. Um, so I would just always be keeping that, yeah, you know. Understood. Thank you. Anything else? Okay, I'll do this quickly. I know there wasn't a specific ask for, um, case law, but I do think this is an important case that was at the, um. appeal level, um, this year, and we don't get
030a lot of Brown Act cases that go that… that high. So, long story short is this case deals with the provision of the Brown Act that permits an agency to clear the room. When there's a disruption, and then obviously reconvene to the extent they are able to reconvene. And so here. The plaintiffs in this case allege that at three different city council meetings in 23 and 24. But the city recessed. Um, and then they reconvened in smaller locations, smaller rooms, so it wasn't where the meeting was being held. Um, and they argued that it was permissible under the Education Code that says you can clear the room and reconvene. The trial court actually agreed with the city in that case, um, and it went up to appeal. And it was overturned on appeal, and basically
031the decision was, no, that's not what the law says. The law says you can order the room to be cleared if. If it's an individual, really what you should be doing, if it's an individual is. utilizing the mechanism out of the Brown Act to remove that individual, but sometimes, you know, it's… numerous folks, and it's hard to… so you must order the room, and then if you do reconvene, you have to reconvene where you are physically located, and there has to be space for everybody. In this case, they kind of… there wasn't even enough room in the small locations for folks like media and stuff to come, so… It clarified what I thought was already a pretty clear rule, but the fact that the trial court. actually agree with the agency, and then it was
032overturned on FL does show that there must have been some ambiguity there, so… Just clarifying that to the extent you ever need to reconvene after clearing the room, let's reconvene back where you. originated in your meeting yet. Questions on that? Very, very interesting. The next one will be super interesting. Okay, do we want to move on to the next item? Um, the next item we're going to move on to is discussion and possible action regarding legal counsel. Okay. You want me to read it? If you'd like to introduce the why, I'm happy to have you do that. Well, we have two wives. Let's do the updated Y. At its regular meeting on September 10, 2025. The County Board of Education requested a study session in October to further examine matters related to legal representation. Following
033advice previously provided by the County Council's office. Subsequently, on September 23rd, 2025, the County Council notified the Solano County Office of Education. But his decision to terminate the existing legal services agreement with scope. In light of these developments, the board has arranged for outside legal counsel to facilitate a study session to discuss. The respective roles of the County Board of Education and the County Superintendent of Schools. And engaging and accessing legal counsel. The board will also review and discuss its current policy regarding the use of legal counsel. or Policy 9124. And there's possible action to designate a potential general in-house counsel, and I'll turn it over to… Our special counsel. President Coleman. Um, so just to clarify, obviously, we all know there's been various circumstances that had led to the meeting today. The scope of
034today's meeting is going to be focused on the rules regarding. legal counsel, retention of legal counsel when we're dealing with a county board and a county superintendent. Alex, specifically at your board policy and what it… what it provides. And then at the end, we'll open up sort of a discussion amongst you all to discuss sort of what your expectations are for your legal counsel. And both in-house and outside counsel. Um, and when I say in-house, the way my brain works as general counsel and your board policy says in-house slash general. I'm gonna say general. Council, and what your expectations are for your special outside counsel as well. And then an opportunity for you all, should you decide to make a motion in terms of who it is that you would like to designate as your
035now in-house slash general counsel, given that you don't currently have. Anybody in my termination of services agreement, so… Just wanted to set the stage in terms of the scope of this. At the conclusion, there's a designation. 5 new in-house general counsel, and there's an interest in getting. advice or direction on issues that you were previously advised on, um, in terms of, you know, a potential letter that you received from another. agency, um… And we can certainly provide some direction to… look into that further and discuss next steps to ensure that that particular topic, to the extent it requires attorney-client privilege communications. Um, that that information is provided to you in a way that is confidential in an attorney-client privilege, as opposed to a discussion and open. So, makes sense. This one, obviously, is an important
036discussion for you all, so after I talk about the law. Please feel free to chime in and discuss. I mean, this is also a study session, so while I'm sitting in front of you all, and you're all staring at me. This certainly is an opportunity for you all to engage with each other, um, as opposed to necessarily just listening to me. talking to you for the rest of the evening. Okay, this is a long, long education code section, and the most important thing is the last line that's bolded. Basically, what this says is that school districts and county boards and county superintendents can retain legal counsel. Yes, we know that. Um, but the last sentence says, the County Board of Education and the Superintendent of Schools. must have the same legal counsel. Which I know
037you all know that, and it's codified in your policy, but that's the most important thing. So that sets the stage for. the law. Um, next slide from Amanda, thank you. There was an attorney. general opinion in 2020, excuse me, 2003. That clarified some points. Which I know kind of addresses some of the questions about when can the board get their own legal counsel. And so, the county board may not appoint outside counsel in addition to its in-house counsel hired by the county superintendent. to provide unrestricted independent advice to the board. So the, the, the… thing to focus on here is that unrestricted independent advice to the board, right? whoever's providing that unrestricted independent advice is going to be your in-house or general counsel. So as a board, if you have, like, one-off things, like, for
038example. charge still matters, right? Our firm currently provides you with. your charter school stuff, because that's sort of a subset of your jurisdiction. Um, but we wouldn't be able to utilize an outside counsel for unrestricted. independent advice. So, this opinion did say that a county board may contract with outside counsel to provide advice directly to the board in any of the following circumstances. it in-house has a conflict. Um, sometimes that happens, particularly when you're dealing with the county board. law firms who represent educational agencies, right, may represent a school district. That falls within the jurisdiction of the County Board, and there may be a conflict. Um, and House Council has failed to render timely advice in a particular matter. The third, the service is being sought are in addition to those usually ordinarily and regularly
039obtained from in-house counsel, so I think an example would have been, for example, your charter school matters, right? Your in-house counsel previously did not. advise on charter school matters. Um, and then if the county board desires a second legal opinion from that provided by in-house counsel on a particular matter. So if you've gotten some advice from your in-house counsel, and you're like, we want to second it. That would be, uh, an opportunity to seek outside counsel. So these are in an AG opinion, Attorney General opinion. Attorney General opinions are not law, but this is pretty widely accepted, and… would be informative, should this ever, you know, go to a court. A court would probably look at this. Um, and I think that these are pretty accepted. things. I think this is actually even codified in
040your board policy, which we'll look at in a minute. So, moving on to your actual board policy endpoint. It was adopted originally in 1979. I wanted to provide some context, and you may all know this already, um, but, you know, when I started working in education law, it was… it was new. to me. Um, historically, county council has provided advice. to many, like, we're talking, like, 70s and 80s to public agencies. very special districts, you know, all various special districts. Um, and so there was a shift, sort of, in the 80s, and then moving forward, where you sort of have these law firms come. to be that we're more particularized and specialized in terms of their education. whatever it was, whether it was education law, fire districts, whether it was, you know, related to that,
041police departments, so on and so forth, and so. with the emergence of those various. law firms that specialize in, obviously, every year there's more laws that are enacted, right? The body of law governing. Um, your various agencies continues to increase, and the need for specialized expertise has increased over time and over the decades. I would say probably is, um, at this moment in time, the most, uh, needy needed. Um, and so with that, County Council has sort of shifted in terms of who they have generally advised, but there are still county boards and various. public agencies who use county counselors or in-house counsel, but that's not necessarily going to be how it is. across the board. So, um… I imagine that, you know, the context of how your policy looks is given a timeframe when
042it was first adopted in 79, and how you have this distinction of your in-house counsel and. outside counselors and your current or previous. in-house counsel was probably stems from the, sort of. when things were historically. And then you revised it not until 2019. And then again in 2023, and I… I don't assist in that, I do recall, I remember that there was an ad hoc committee, and there were some revisions, and I know you all will be able to speak more thoroughly as to what those amendments were. Um, so… Questions for anyone? Does anyone have anything to add to the sort of historical context of… how rewarding in particular, has utilized. Well, I think going forward. I mean, there's nothing we can do about what happened in the past. You know, whether we thought it
043was right or wrong, or… it's just… Doesn't make sense to keep dwelling on it. Going forward, though, now that we have this opportunity. You know, I think… Number one, we never saw a legal services agreement. with county council? I can tell you that. That never happened. We didn't know how much we were paying county council. We didn't know any of the… what they did, what they didn't do. We were just told, here, this is who the superintendent chose, and this is what… and then when. It came around to… Uh, charter schools, and we were gonna be… then we really put our foot down. Nah, we gotta have special counsel for this, because… County Council doesn't know all the ins and outs of the charter school, and that's how you guys came about. We got to
044choose, right? The superintendent and the board. saw, you know, 3 or 5, I forget, and then, um… We agreed on, you know, you guys. That's the first time in the history of this organization. Wow. Okay, that's helpful context for me, too. I mean, I'm very familiar with RFP, and. what happened in 2019, I think it was, like, just in November or December of 2019, but I didn't realize that was the first time you've all ever done that before. Oh, very definitely. Well, we had a charter lawyer, it just wasn't one that the board had had any voice in choosing. So, there were some shifts. I appreciate that. Um, we want to move forward. I would like to dwell a moment, though. Um, because I'm understanding that… County Council sent a letter to… Either the superintendent
045or the office. not to us. There was no communication before the termination. letter arrived. For example, a little meet and confer, or hay. This isn't cool, or whatever it would be. I haven't seen the contract, so I don't know. know the particulars of how that… oh, do we have it? I'm sorry, I missed it. Um, but in any case… That's… that struck me as incredibly unusual, especially for a client that you've had. For decades. So, I just wanted to make sure I was understanding the facts correctly. that all that happened, there were no communications with the board president. with the superintendent, with other council, just, we got this letter. one-page letter, I think. that we're terminating the contract because of things that were said that one night. Is that correct? Yeah, that's very shocking to
046me. This is an editorial. I'm extremely shocked. I've worked with county council for many, many years. or against them, as long. Might be the case. Um, I'm stunned by that. That's a very… Yeah, it's stunning. Just as a lawyer. And as someone who's involved in county stuff, I'm… I'm saddened that that's how that happened. Um, but it also leads to this question of people. this idea that superintendent, and I think you're going to talk about. Superintendent and county board. have the same lawyer and the superintendent as the voice of the entire organization. So, I know we're gonna talk about that, but I'm teeing that up. So I appreciate… I just want to double-check my facts, because it's still blowing my mind. The letter that we received from County Council. didn't specify, the only thing it
047said was. They were terminating due to Section 7. Which is, either party may terminate this agreement at any time for any reason within 30-day notice. That's what they gave as the reasoning for… I thought the letter said, based on… on something… the words, and I'm sorry, I had it in my hand, and I said it down and didn't bring it with me. I understood it to say something like, based on comments. made on a certain night. It would appear that you could… get better service elsewhere? I mean, I didn't see that one. I just saw the legal services agreement. Hmm. Okay, this is different than what I read. Let's see if I can pull it up. Okay. I didn't see one that said something about comments set at a meeting. Thank you. It may have
048in the cover email, in which that was attached to. I got a comment that was included in the cover email. Because it was definitely stated. based on comments at our particular meeting, it would appear that. Someone else could serve us better, or something like that. I'm sorry to be paraphrasing. Am I the only one that remembers that? It was… I remember some… not… maybe not quite exactly like what you thought. I got the… it was my impression they had been called out at a meeting. And instead of come and talk about it, they quit. And all that. Well, I've said my piece. I'm disappointed and saddened. Oh, Trustee Shark. I would also say in that legal agreement, it said 30 days notice, but quitting… And then not showing up to the next meeting. isn't actually
049finishing your 30 days of service. That is correct. So, they left our new superintendent in a position. You find an attorney last minute after being called out for… advice that maybe needed a second looking at. And I have the… I have the email pulled up. That came from… County Council. That was dated on September 23rd. It's in there, right? It's in there. Yeah, that's sad. I'm terribly saddened. I'm troubled more than saddened. Not… not what I would have expected. Well, I would… I mean, just looking at the legal services agreement. We understand why they didn't notify the board, because. Their agreement was just between. County Council and the County Office of Education. It had nothing to do with the Board of Education. There are two separate entities, and their agreement was only with. the Office
050of Education. Yeah, that's a great point, if you're okay, I kind of want to transition to that and your actual board policy, because. If I can give you some, like, kind of context. statewide, to your point, Trustee Dean, is, like, the way… how it is… oftentimes is, like, your county superintendent. is executing agreement on behalf of the county office or that agency, and because of the statute. A few slides ago, it's, like, by operation of law, then you are then also having the county board is that also serves as a council, and so… I think because we have agenda as a discussion regarding our board policy, and it's something to think about is if you want to expressly put that in there explicitly put that in there, that. Either a couple of thoughts. One, you
051also want to have an agreement with whoever your. attorneys are, right? Part 1 and part two of those… obviously, if you're specifically included as a party, then that contract would need to come to the county board for approval. So that's something you're… you're interested in adding and codifying. For lack of a better word, into your board policy, we can certainly do that, because I will just say, like, statewide, if not uncommon to have your county superintendent sign a contract, and then by operation of law, it's in the county boards. council as well. Usually, you would hope that there's some discussion and dialogue regarding who that attorney is, but… That's not necessarily the practice, and so if that's something that you, in particular, want to make a practice, I think that. Well, I think it… as
052long… if we're listed, at least as the board in the… legal services agreement. then if they're gonna quit us, they would at least have to notify the board. You know? I mean, to get, you know. ambushed this way, you know, by county council to say, oh, and by the way, we're not showing up at the next meeting either. And we're just not going to be your attorneys anymore. They didn't even notify us of that. You know, so I don't want to see that happen again, so I think we do need to codify it in our policy that any legal services agreement that we enter into or is going to represent us, we should be at least named in that legal services agreement. I mean, we're not making a decision tonight. But I guess we're gonna
053fire up the old policy committee. Here's the direction that, at a subsequent meetings. I mean, it is a big issue, but we remediate that by amending the policy. Yeah, so we'll have a subsequent… There may be other policy… Changes to discuss tonight? Yeah. But for the moment, that sounds very reasonable. as, uh, something that the policy committee should look at. Unless we don't need a. We're not… we don't… we just redid the… all the policies. I think we need to look at 9124, right? We can make an amendment. Just amend that one. To reflect that, we know we need to be named in any legal services agreement. And then we can just bring it back. Agendize it for an initial sun shining, and you can either approve it at your initial sunshine, or… a subsequent
054one, so I'm hearing direction to make that. In a giant pile by the time we're done, but for the moment. That seems reasonable. Okay, so now we can turn to the actual language, and I'm sure… do you all have a copy of your board policy 821? 9124? If not, I have physical screens. Does anyone want a physical copy? I'm a… sorry, the trees that I'm on a… physical copy, kind of. Did you say you wanted to… Okay. Passing them around. You're probably really good with your… Maybe our audience members. Sure, thank you. Sure. Okay, short and sweet. So there's sort of two categories of, or buckets, if you will, of your, of your legal counsel. Um, you have your first one, which is your general in-house counsel. Um, which is sort of your go-to individual,
055um, which currently. We don't have that, um… an in-house, in my brain again, when I hear in-house, I hear… I think of someone, like, on the payroll, but it doesn't have to be that under the education code, it can be a solo practitioner, it can be a… you know, a law firm, whoever it is. And then you have the second bucket down here, your special outside counsel, for example, when you've gone to Lazana Smith for charter school matters, it essentially allows you to use your outside counsel. And it codifies that Attorney General position that I went over with you all a little bit ago. Um, and something he did an RFP back in 2019, where he would, I think he had, like, a little bench of law firms that you can utilize for special outside.
056purposes. Um… So, here's your policy, any discussion you all want to have about what it currently provides for, and if you ever want any clarity or questions or comments about. You know, we're gonna open up at the end. I have some questions for you all to pose to start a discussion about expectations and. who you'd like to move forward with, but if you have any specific questions regarding your policy, this is… I have a… comment slash specific question. Um, to… One, in-house council has a conflict of interest. So, from time to time… It does occur that there is a conflict between the county superintendent, not specifically our. situation, but across the state. County Superintendent and the County Board of Education. So that's an obvious conflict of interest, right? But, uh, my thought, or… Or… I
057don't know if it rises to concern. I note that, um. The board might not even know that the conflict is arising, so I'm interested in. steps to be put in place, or talked about. Wherein… I would… I would suggest the lawyer would be able to see it. Yes, I mean, normally it should… I mean… Under this one, what should really happen is we as legal counsel have ethical obligations. If we have identified a… even a potential conflict. There's a… there's a various degrees of… Whether it's an actual conflict, a direct conflict, we also internally, like, we have ethics council, we have an attorney that's ethics counsel within our firm. If we have a question about something, and we identify it, and it is our obligation to notify. our clients, so if that's the county board
058and or county superintendent, then we have an obligation to notify them. So, the onus really is on when it talks about that in-house conflict of interest. It really is on the… legal counsel to identify that, but there may be times. And this is rare, but let's say there's a conflict between the county board, like you mentioned, and the county superintendent. And it seems obvious, and your council's not identifying that, that's problematic, but that would be an instance in which she would, as a board, would say, hey, like. We clearly feel like we… we don't think you can provide us, you know, unbi… whatever it is, unbiased, whatever the opinion is. Because of the conflict here with your county superintendent. So you can certainly. noted, but I would hope that your legal counsel… I mean, it's
059really… they have an ethical obligation to notify that. And two other comments. So, uh, in that case… Um, and in the cases like I've gone to court, with the two separate entities, right? the… I think it's… And I know it, and you know it, you have to get out entirely, right? But I don't know that that's you being our normal in-house counsel. has a conflict with, uh, let's say, the board. They can't participate in this at all. So, I just… I'm feeling like there's a bit of a slippery slope. If we're not really… always aware of what's happening, so… I raise it as a note. In the hierarchy, not a concern and not a worry, but a note. that, um, it feels like that could be better art… what happens in that circumstance could be
060better articulated. in our policy. I may be the only one that feels that way. But do you understand what I'm saying? Now, this policy came directly from that. Yes, understood. That's just exactly what the ED code is. We didn't change any of that. And we certainly know, the attorneys certainly know their ethical obligations. Some attorneys, I'm not naming any. Some attorneys might not owe it, not that no one in this room, um, might not always meet those obligations, but we certainly know them, and we have independent obligation to meet them, and we can get. sanctioned and disbarred and everything else if we don't do them. But I feel like because we're a governing body, it would be helpful for us to articulate our thoughts, or our positions. on those couple of things, mostly for the
061public and for. Those who come after us. Can I ask you a follow-up question to that, just for clarification? I usually ask me the question, so I have a question for you. Um, am I understanding that there's an interest in potentially, like, adding some in the case that, number one exists? what is… what is the board's expectations in terms of… expectations and rights and responsibilities in terms of next steps, in terms of what you will do in that scenario? And what our accountant will do, our conduct of counsel in that. Okay, okay. Get out. I understand that. Yeah. But again, if we're gonna… have the new, uh, edited policy come before us next month or otherwise. That would be… a thing I would be interested in. And, um… Including, in some manner. I'm happy to
062propose some language to that point. For your consideration, that's… like the general consensus is non-heads. Okay, other comments, thoughts, questions regarding your… existing policy? So, let me see if we're clear here. Moving forward, do you think we need to have. Just an amendment to this policy, or… We need a whole committee to delve into it. An amendment. Amendment. If we could do it by amendment. It might take us a… Let's… let's take a consensus here. Somebody would like amendments? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. That's unanimous. It'll be an amendment, so… And it may take… it may really take one, you know, we may actually have to use two meetings and maybe more, but the first and second render approach. Yeah. Okay. Great. Thank you. We'll work on language. So, two notes so far. One about
063revising your policy to address or amend your policy to address, um. ensuring that the county board is included as a party to any sort of services agreement, and obviously then it would come to the board, because you're a party and need to approve it. an amendment to contemplate what happens in the case that number one. comes to be, and what are the… both the expectations, rights, and responsibilities of the board, but also your. general in-house counsel who has that. conflicts. Okay. Other thoughts, comments, questions? I mean, I think the first one is easy, it just… puts a sentence in there, really, at the end. the legal services agreement will list. the client, as both the superintendent, county superintendent of schools and county board of education. Three, basically three parties. Agree. Yeah, I think it's one
064sentence. Yeah, it's fine. So then how would you add the, uh, the conflicts of interest? Would you just make that a third paragraph in one? I think… I almost see it being, like. It really falls under the first bucket, even though it's falling under the second, so I'm pointing to a paper that you all are not seeing, is I think that the obligations will be under number 1 to the extent there's, I see, like, a paragraph to the extent. general in-house counsel, has a conflict of interest in which they are not able to provide advice. to county board and our county superintendent, here are the sets that will fall off. So I see it kind of being there, and then that leads you to, okay, now we can go to bucket number two to find
065an outside counsel. Because we have that. So that's how I see it. Like, a third paragraph under number 1, if that… Makes sense for everyone else. Yeah. Okay. And then it leaves you all moves into number 2. And that will include the conduct? Yes. And I need clarification for staff. In terms of which board meeting? So, if it's going to be included in the November board meeting, we would need to have. that information within the next 5 days. By Friday. By Friday. I don't know that we're in as dramatic hurry over this, right? I'm gonna let you all decide. Okay, I would say whatever you want. December, okay. Okay. Actually, actually, actually, December's… Yeah, next year. That'll be, uh, a high priority. Let the board president make that determination. Yeah. Um, can we talk about
066two? 22? Roman numeral 2, um, other numeral 2. Yes, of course. How is this a special council thing? Why isn't it we fire the in-house counsel? I don't under… what? What does that mean? Are you referring to, number one in particular? We get special outside counsel in the event, in-house counsel has scaled to render timely advice in a particular manner. What? Well, that's my problem. They don't be born. Well, I don't know that it's terrible to take it out, but it seems… I can't really amend Ed Code, we're on the wrong… I mean, that's clearly going to be part of whatever contract we sign, right? But that's odd. That's not… Sure. I mean, I will say… as agencies, when you have a council. Big picture, if there's ever dissatisfaction with that council, you always have
067the right to terminate those services, and if one of the reasons is because. At least that's how this came about. The superintendent cannot choose your doctor either? This came out of the Policy Center, California Policy Center. Yeah. And that's what this was in Orange County. This happened, where the general in-house counsel did not render advice, and the board said, no, we want to go and. in our own council, and so this went to opinion, and this is under Ed Code and stuff, and this is helpful. That came about. not number 2 in the Ed Code. was through this decision. It's interesting. Orange County. I mean, I don't… it doesn't bother me enough to take it out, it's just… It really should be covered elsewhere. Wordsmithing. Yeah. Okay. If nothing else, I think the next slide
068just has, um… quote, posing some questions for you all. Oh, sorry, one more. slide. Um… So if nothing else on the policy itself… I threw this in here mostly to show, kind of, the instances in which the county superintendent may and county office may on their own. need to seek legal advice that… fully falls outside the jurisdiction of the county board, and then sort of those areas in which the County Board. would seek advice as well. So, um, again, these are just… very high-level topics, but I think it gives some insight into the use of legal counsel at the county level. Um, so accountability and oversight of school districts, both financially and elsewhere. management and monitoring of personnel, so if there's HR-related matters, you know, your county superintendent will utilize their general counsel for. Discipline,
069labor and negotiations. the gamut of, uh, labor and employment types of things. Um, development of the COE, LCAP, and budget, mostly legal counsel is not utilized for that, but that is something that falls within the jurisdiction of your county superintendent. And then oversight of school districts on the administrative side, obviously the county board, once you pop over to the other side. They're responsible for appeals and authorization, and then you use your county office for the administrative oversight. Expulsion appeals, which I know you do get those from time to time, inter-district transfer appeals, obviously, a particularly hot subject. Um, and then another duty is approval of the annual budget of the county superintendent, which is not something you would utilize. county, or excuse me, legal counsel for, but I just wanted to throw that out there
070to kind of show the buckets of when. Normally, legal counsel might get involved. The next slide now, I forgot about that one. So these are some questions, to the extent you're interested in having a dialogue about, you know, what is the county board. and county superintendents, as well, expectations for both their in-house general counsel. And then, as well as their outside special counsel, and then… who does, um, the county superintendent, county board of education want to designate as their general. slash in-house counsel, and then there's an opportunity should you decide to make a motion this evening. We've aged it such that you can take action to designate someone in light of the circumstances, so… Any thoughts or comments on these… on these questions that I have posed? In terms of your expectations, desires. Let's see,
071Dane? Anybody? Wanna go? I'll go, or you can go first. Either way, you can go first. Well, um, in terms of expectations for in-house counsel, and actually special counsel, I would expect them to be. competent, credible. timely. Um, and, uh, communicative. I have a question on that, not to derail the conversation, but I know that, and I don't think it's. in here, um… No, it is in here. Uh… individual board members may not see, because when you said communicative, for example, right, so individual board members, and it is codified in here, my apologies, your second paragraph. Individual board members may not seek advice from general in-house counsel. Regarding matters under the Board's jurisdiction. Um, when so directed by a majority of the board, the county superintendent may contact them. I know some… some… policies specifically
072say, like, everything needs to go through the county, or excuse me, the board president, so the board president can have contact and stuff, but it sounds like that's already been contemplated. Spotify there, so I just wanted to address your communicative thing. There's obviously certain. Restrictions on communication. Um, and so on and so forth. Yeah, I don't… I don't mean that, although, thinking it through, that might be another little thing to tweak in our policy. Um, I didn't have that specifically in mind, but… We've all been… I'll just say this. Most of the most recent Among Us has been here for, like, almost 10 years, correct? Two cycles, anyway, and… I've forgotten which one of you that is. Yes, yes, okay. December 2018. Okay. Okay. So yeah, we know the rules, right? And we know what
073our job is. No one needs to write us memos to tell us what our jurisdiction is. Um, but… I wonder… until we know. not to, like, call you and say, hey, this, you know, this is ridiculous, blah blah blah. But I wonder about… That isn't the board president reach out, um, whether it's in the county, it depends on whether it's the county or school district context, but while we'll either notify the board president and or superintendent. So that's just, like, my practice that should. be the practice, generally. I can't speak for others, but if there is a question, it's not like a titletale, it's like, hey, this question came. I want to make you aware of it, like, do we have… do we want to agendize this for a subsequent board meeting, or so on
074and so forth? Um, because folks sometimes don't necessarily… that are newer to the board, you're obviously, you know, veterans here, but that does happen, where they're like, hey, you're a legal counsel, we want to reach out to you, and not realizing that that's actually a restriction, so… Yeah, it's tricky. Okay. So, may I, just to clarify for myself, that. Um, so when you… if you were to get a communication from the board president. would the board president then have had to get consensus from the board? So, you're not getting it just from the president. you're getting the board is getting direction, or the board is giving direction. to the president. to then contact Council. not just independent. As president, I have this question. I mean, I don't really want… I don't want to make generalizations,
075but generally, yes, it's like getting direction to… and it actually the way you have it in your. your, um, core policy is actually sort of the county superintendent to reach out to, to. to Council. Um, but there are times where there may be an ongoing. issue where we have been working with the county board on something, for example, we're agendizing things and getting things ready for something, in which that just naturally happens. Um, or there may be an issue that the board president decides to bring forward, and there's a discussion about putting it on an agenda so that the whole board can provide their input on it. There's never really going to be an instance where you're just. We're just giving advice to a board president on something. It will eventually always come back to
076the body as a whole. So again, you said that your practice was to talk to the board president and or the superintendent. Our policy would prevail in that it would all go through our superintendent. That's the way your current policy reads, is that when so directed by a majority of the board, the county superintendent may contact such legal counsel to provide the board with legal information or advice. So that's the way it's currently phrased. Not sure if that's something you all want to discuss further. It's… here's the thing, and this is a… study session, so I think we can… Here's the issue. As a practical matter, what's going to come up? Something's gonna come up. Outside of our board meeting timeframe. And let's say I know about it, right? And I call Michelle and say,
077Michelle. Or I call you and say, la la la la, and you go, oh, I can't talk to you, let me talk to Michelle. And so now Michelle knows, so the two of us know. Right? Who's… how is she going to get consensus? She could talk to one other person. So, right? Are we all with me? So that's the practical matter that's tricky. I do think it's very important that the board president be able to represent. communications with… or to have communications with our legal counsel. I'm just… I'm thoughtful about how that works. And I think that's fair, because you're not always going to want to necessarily bring something back to an open session agenda item to get consent. Let's say, like, there's litigation or something. You can't bring that back to the board for
078consensus. So, as a practical matter, usually conversations both. the district and school district are with… that there is… the ability to communicate with your board president on those types of matters. Pretty transparently, as is my practice. I know it isn't specifically codify that in your current board policy, but. It is my understanding that that is also the practice. Well, because the board president is the one who sets the agenda, so if there needs to be a consensus. They can always put it on the… agenda to get a consensus or not get a consensus. But isn't that consensus brought about through the superintendent, or at least in conjunction with the superintendent? So it's not… it's not just the president. It's always involving the superintendent in that. And to put it on the agenda? Yeah. No? No.
079She's in… we always have agenda reviews, and we do collaborate together on the agenda. But it's… it's in the statute, it's the board president that sets the agenda. But with the cooperation of the superintendent, because often that involves staff. And… and work behind the scenes, so it's not… it's not… just the president. No, I think… I don't… I think there's the verb that matters here. So the decision rests with the president, that there is consultation, maybe? I think it's consultation. Whatever the verb is, certainly, the concept being respecting. the staff circumstance. But what we're talking about here is a kind of a regular thing. It's like something comes up. Right? Yeah. It's in the rare occasion that something comes up. I think Trustee Cohen-Thompson, you have a question? In the case that there's an issue
080that comes up. In, um… Because we don't come… we… it says here that we don't… we do not come to council. But we go to the superintendent. And we thoroughly discuss whatever that is, bring all the issues to bear. And then Superintendent. calls counsel. to get, um, directions on whatever that issue is. And then brings that back to the board. Am I… am I correct in that? I'll just… throwing out. That issue that came up with me. Um, where they approached the board about wanting me to get off the board about something, uh, that they brought up. The superintendent then had already talked to the board and cleared it, and that. And that didn't apply to me. But then, when it went forth. Council used that and said, I have to make a decision, when
081clearly that issue. Well, county, um… Uh, county board… member… I wasn't sitting on the board of supervisors. It wasn't the Board of Education. But there was… there's something like that. You said here, it is a law. But somebody said something 20 years ago. and Council used that. But then I had to make a decision. It was not difficult for me to make a decision, because I knew. what the importance was, but the fact that I had sought. information before. I even made a determination to sit on a… on that particular board, local board. that it would not be a conflict of interest, and I was told it wouldn't. I even went to the city, and the city said. No, there is no conflict of interest. then the, um… ambitiousness of that particular group. turned around
082and came, and I don't know, I guess they, uh… What do you do? put a suit against the… the… County Board of Education, however it was. it went to the county board. I mean, it went to the county office. And they came back and said that they had to abide by whatever this. I'll just say white paper, uh… And as an Attorney General opinion… Right, and it was an opinion, but it was. totally not applicable, because it was two different boards. So I'm saying, if something comes up. All right, even with the president, there's something pressing. that she needs to have. uh, understanding herself. concerning this, then. she would take that to the… superintendent, and the superintendent would then take that issue. No. So, you could go directly… she should be. I'm suggesting that we
083should look at that. Right? Especially because. whoever our attorney is going to be, they're going to be our client. So, if they're our client… I'm sorry, we're going to be their client. So if we are their client, actually. then they've got to have somebody to be able to talk to. Right. This needs further exploration. It doesn't. That we can't. But some of that will be determined in who you hire as general counsel. Mighty, you know… In mind that we need… we need to have a… a general counsel… That has multiple… Players in it, you know? I mean, what… yeah, just as I understand your point. But my point is, if… um… an entity, like a group, a community group is my client. somebody from that group has to be the spokesperson for the group, if
084you will. And I have to be able to communicate with them. Right? I hear what you're saying. So this idea that our in-house counsel always goes to the superintendent, maybe sometimes. But I think it would be important, especially, and this is going to come up in the contract. that they… as their client. the… there is a pathway for us to communicate with them directly. Which would be the board prep. I think we would be the board president. A consensus from the board to talk to the… Yeah. In-house counsel, yeah. Yeah, but then it's just you. Right? Just the board president. That's doing the kinds of talking. Oh, that's different than what I'm talking about. But anyway, it needs to be looked at, I think. And that would naturally come up in the contract discussion. I
085mean, I hear what you're saying. Well, I guess the county superintendent, they are their own agency, right? You are your own agency who. who is the… well, it's kind of sometimes serves as a conduit. Not designated the only… Exactly. My apologies, I'm gonna turn this off while I get this out of mine. Anything else? Other thoughts? Since we are without council… I mean, I think we should… have some type of ad hoc committee to. look into securing some… in-house counsel with the superintendent. Agreed. Are we… are we there then? What does the county… Want to… who does the county want to designate? Is that our question we're looking at? So, we're talking about the first one, because I didn't get to give mine. I skipped ahead. And I definitely agree with everything that, uh, Trustee
086Dean said. Um, communication is really important. Um, I also, I like your… the proactive that you're watching for, um… Conflict of interest and conduct, um… With, uh, Trustee Cohen-Thompson's, that was… And I wasn't because nobody ever called me in to talk to me. But it was… it was something that was covered. They literally… our previous council came in and gave a presentation on it. with that very white paper. And then sat here through meetings and never said boo. So that's a problem, which goes to my other expectation, which is sad that one has to say this, but… that our council would be paying attention to the meeting while they're sitting here? Because we had, um… Numerous times where it was obvious they weren't making it, but one so bad that we had to… go back,
087and it basically… have the conversation over again. And then that attorney didn't show back up again. We never saw her again, and there was no explanation. So, um, to that, it would also be… Not a generalist, but someone specializing in education, so that we're getting good, solid advice. So, as far as what… I personally think we should do, um… Since we're not gonna redo our board policy until January. I, uh, would suggest that we keep our. I believe to be excellent counsel, and hold on to them. Until we can do an ad hoc committee, and I would think. We would do the ad hoc committee after we finished the policy. So that the ad hoc committee would work off of the new policy. And then we could go through. I don't think we've had any
088complaints. I'm quite pleased with our current council. Um, and I think that would… that would… make it where we can do it in a thoughtful. Um, reasons why, and not have it. You know, in the Christmas wash. So we have some kind of temporary arrangement that we could extend, is that where we're at? Like an interim? Basically, interim designation. And are you willing? I mean, of course, no, of course! I mean, of course, and I will just say. to your point about, um. Not a generalist, not to sell us. I know we did an RFP, and I think that. you are all present for that RF. see, right? So, 2019, were we all here? Yeah, so you're familiar with… familiar with the fact that. Like, we have particular practice groups where we have folks who
089specialize in certain subject matters, so to the extent that's ever a concern, if something comes up that. I specifically am not available, or you are interested in somebody else, like. We have a bench, I like to call it a bench and a team, so… Um, to the extent that's of particular interest, which I'm gathering it is. Um, that is something that we offer and provide, so… Yeah, I, I… I'm doing all the talking again, why is that? But I think… That sounds reasonable to me, so long as it's very clear that this is a temporary. assignment until we go through the process of bringing in new counsel. And, you know, 2019 was 6 years ago. And it was a whole different world. So, I would be, uh, not opposed to going through… creating a subcommittee
090and going through the whole thing we went through last night. So can we entertain a motion that is all right? So, I would make the motion that we… extend or retain our interim agreement with our current council. We'll appoint, we'll appoint Lazana Smith as the interim, uh. Council, and that we would… work on our board policies in January, and once those are completed, we would assemble an ad hoc committee, uh, that would. the hiring committee, or the… getting it ready for the RFP committee. I can second that, but… With a friendly amendment that we put a date… not a date certain, but a terminating date, which would be… Until such time that we… Um, contract for permanent… Council. Absolutely. Okay, so the motion on the floor right now is that we appoint Lozano Smith as
091our interim. general in-house counsel. Until a time that… We have selected… contract for, or contracted… uh, General Counsel. Permanent. Permanent general counsel. Does that about sum that up? That sounds perfectly. So, any discussion on this? Okay, let's take a roll call vote then, Monica. Trustee Cheek? Trustee Cohen-Thompson? Yes. Trustee Dean? Yes. Trustee Dunn? Yes. Trustee Lavelle? Yes. Trustee Sharp? Yes. Trustee Coleman? Yes. That makes it unanimous, minus trustee G. Okay, the one other thing is, would it, as a consensus. There are some other outstanding issues. That maybe need legal advice… counsel? Can we schedule maybe a closed session to discuss some of those to… Dot the I's and crossed the T's. That one's gonna be our next, um… topic is, now that we have an interim general counsel. That we need to have a closed
092session. to discuss, um… possible other stuff that's coming down. Well, something. possible litigation. We'll make sure that we agendize any closed sessions in accordance with the Brown Act, and we'll make sure, yeah, we get everything on. accordingly, and then reaching out on other things that come up, so… Just thank you, we appreciate it, and we… It's a pleasure, as always, to work with you all, and I appreciate the opportunity here this evening. You're very sweet, thank you. So, any other questions, or… comments from the board? It's about all the study session we have.