001Good morning. I will call this uh forum topic to and opened our meeting at 10:35 and turn it over to Mr. McDaniel. All right, thank you. Um well, good morning, everybody, and uh we're here to discuss a forum topic that Mr. Frisch and I have proposed. Um it's been on board docs and circulator for a while now. Um but the title of the forum topic is the creation of a school board legislative committee. Effectively, what functionally what this does is right now the school board, as we all know, has two legislative liaisons that operate sometimes together, sometimes separately. We have a state liaison, which handles the work that's done down in Richmond with our delegation, which we have about two dozen members from Fairfax County, give or take. And on the federal side, we have
002a federal liaison that works with our federal representatives, which potentially could be increasing significantly in the number of federal representatives this fall. Um but uh what this proposal would do would be to take those positions, those two positions, and effectively eliminate them. However, in their place, it would create a standing committee of the board, which would be a legislative committee. Um and that would be modeled after the existing budget committee. The budget committee was different from all other committees in so much as that it's a committee of the whole, so every board member has a seat on that committee. But the day-to-day work, the the really the workflow and the tasking of the work that has to be done with the budget committee, as would be legislative, is delegated to a chair and a vice
003chair. So, what this proposal would do is it would create a legislative committee of the whole that will be led by a chair and a vice chair. I think this accomplishes a couple of um things. Number one, it marries the state and federal um role. Um number two, it has continuity in the workflow. So, if it potentially followed the tradition, not the requirement, but the tradition of the budget committee where the vice chair becomes a chair, and then the next year that cycles through, um instead of, you know, two brand new people taking up the work that's been ongoing, there would be more of a cadence of a workflow, um and more of that institutional um continuance of the workflow. Um and I think overall, you know, we're in a situation now, especially on the
004funding side, where we need to be getting uh continue to be in and increase our efforts in Richmond and with the federal government to lobby and to advocate for things that school divisions need, not only here in Fairfax County, but in my opinion, you know, the rising tide lifts all boats, and if we get things out of Richmond that all other school divisions across the Commonwealth get, um it will have a benefit of K-12 education for all of Virginia. Um so, I'm happy to answer any questions. It was a lengthy document. I want to thank my staff for doing the research and putting this together. Um and of course, Mr. Frisch as well for, you know, signing on to the forum topic. And Mr. Frisch. The only thing I would add is that um I
005think almost half the board has at some point or another served as liaison for state or federal. Um and, you know, we all have our a different approach to the work, or we've all had a different approach to the work. I think that it has become more and more professional uh over the years, uh particularly in the last three uh three years or three or four years. Um and a standing a standing committee of the whole, I think would enable um more of a you know, there are there are things that happen with budget every single year. It's part of the process, and I think that a standing committee of the whole for legislative issues would result in the same, and, you know, would benefit from the continuity that Mr. McDaniel spoke of. The other
006thing I would say is that uh at least during the pertinent portion of the year, I think uh taking advantage of some of the PM work session uh slots that we have scheduled could be a way to do this committee's work without taking away from these standard setting work sessions. So, um I'm eager to see it move forward. >> Thank you, Dr. Anderson. My apologies, Mr. Moon. Oh, that's okay. That's all right. Thank you. Anyway, you know, I could support this. There used to be a legislative committee a long, long ago. Uh, of course, it was not the committee as a whole for the entire body was Yeah, a subcommittee, but doesn't doesn't matter. You know, improving you know, more board members, you know, perhaps, you know, would work better. Uh, with with that said,
007I'm just uh trying to see how this I think there was some clarification from Mr. Frisch on how the work was going to be done. Uh, e- we have director of a government relations and who will work on behalf of the school system and especially on in a school board's a legislative priorities and positions and advocate or answer from legislators and etc. and report to superintendent and and the school board. I So, that director's work and our committees via chair and vice chair of the committee's work. I don't know how they're going to be because chair and vice chair are supposed to also represent the committee, not just an individual capacity unless, you know, they're advocating something on you know, as an individual school board member. That's one thing. But, if a chair and vice
008chair go down as chair and vice chair of the committee, they should be advocating for. They should be work- I mean, speak on behalf of the board which can only be done through the decisions made by the board. So, you know, very fast changing environment in General Assembly. I've never been a state legislator, so I'm only uh, you know, in in a saying that based upon what I was I've been hearing. How is you able to work with on behalf of the committee, on behalf of the school board, and also with the director of government relations? So, as much as this creates a committee of the whole, there's certain things that don't change, right? Like that what you've described takes place right now and the legislative liaisons uh, articulate the view of the board as
009enshrined in our priorities. If there's something that's not in our priorities, then we don't advocate as a board on its behalf. Individual members can do what they want to do. Uh, but they can certainly to the board to to get it as something that we consider a priority. So, let's say that there's a bill popping up and [snorts] the from bills come up with a different nuances that either in in sort of of in aligned with our positions or contrarily in our position to our positions, then in in those instances, I'm just trying to you know, envision it's coming up today and then they're going to vote on the next day. Yeah. How will chair and vice chair be able to work the rest of the board to convey our positions or our changing positions
010or or I mean, that's where I mean, as an individual board member, you can always go and do it, but as chair and vice chair, then will be you will be putting at different positions. No, I agree and I think that what you just mentioned happens quite frequently in Richmond. So, the formal legislative package would obviously be the backbone of the work, but as things shift and change and get sliced and diced in Richmond, um, this chair and vice chair role are going to be very busy in January, February, and March. Um, I can speak to how the board of supervisors operates with a similar model. And I'm not suggesting this cuz Lord knows we don't necessarily need more meetings, but every Friday afternoon, they have an update with what happened during that week and
011what will be happening the following week and the board takes positions on things as necessary. So, that creating that feedback loop, you know, my hope is that when we move forward with the creation of this, the chair and the vice chair, um, which would I would would be appointed during our reorganization later this summer, would work with Michael Molloy, would work with the board as a whole to put together a workflow process that would capture that feedback for when things do change in Richmond because what I don't want to see, to your point I think, is a communication going it down into the General Assembly that is on behalf of the board when actually it may not necessarily be on behalf of the board. So, um, creating that feedback loop is something that needs to
012do would need to be done post creation, but yes, that that definitely has to occur. Can I ask a follow-up question? Okay, thank you. Thank you. You know, I don't mind doing more work as a one board member and I'm sure that you know, other board members would also agree that, you know, if the work is needed, then we should that should be done. Uh, you mentioned about how the board of supervisors works every Friday, there'll maybe a legislative update and then they actually meet. Is that something you are envisioning for us to do? Like a for 2 months period of time, then we'll meet every Friday every certain time and then get update and actually make a decisions based upon the update being provided? I think what what Mr. McDaniel described as like coming
013up with a process for the workflow is something the committee will work on. Once they've developed a process that they're comfortable with, that's the plan that I think they would take. And they can come back to the board for to approve that plan. So, another I guess another benefit of this is it would you know, as a standing board committee, um, putting that workflow and that timeline, that cadence in place that would then be approved by the board um, immediately post reorganization, probably August, September time frame would address those concerns and be fleshed out. Dr. Anderson. Um, thank you. Thank you for bringing this forward. I I do appreciate um, trying to organize this, so I'm definitely in favor, but I just have some questions about the nuances and unlike Mr. Moon, I I do
014mind doing more work. So, I just want to make sure we're um, managing expectations a little bit. Um, and I think Mr. um, Frisch talked about this a little in terms of how this will be organized as a committee of the whole. So, we would have regular work sessions to um, get the updates and to I I I guess I'm trying to understand would this be during the busy months that we would have these work sessions because it's not as helpful in some parts of the year as it is in others? Well, I actually think the other parts of the year aren't used in the same way because of how busy it is at the you know, at the beginning of the session. Um, but there's no less important work to be done in the
015uh, uh, for lack of a better phrase, off-cycle, right? Relationship building, getting to know staff, all that kind of stuff should be happening. But, how the committee meets and the cadence of those meetings, I think is something that the chair and vice chair of this committee will work on, bring to the board as a plan of attack for the year. Uh, and then with the board's guidance or approval, uh, um, that's how it would move forward. That could result in uh, work sessions it we call them committee meetings, right? Um, and those could be we already have some committee well, we already have some work sessions for the legislative program, etc. Uh, I could see the board saying that we'd also like to have additional work sessions, committee meetings, um, to facilitate the work that's
016agreed to. Sure, thank you. And I do agree that it will do well to support the continuity of work because I think I've been in the federal position for 2 years. Um, while I've enjoyed it, I've also had no blueprint. I just kind of did what made sense. Um, it wasn't that there was a playbook from the person who was in the seat before me. Um, having said that, I do want to make sure that we're not forgetting that federal side because I know Richmond is where our money lies for the most part, well, not for the most part. It's more local than that, but we do have that side of advocacy that does require I think a different kind of um, attention. Um, only because it's a little harder. One of the questions that
017I have also is regarding what should we expect to see differently on this side because I will be honest, I think in the past couple of years, it's been a little bit harder for me to have a handle on what is happening at the state level from staff. Um, we used to have those weekly um, emails from Michael Molloy's office um, that talked about all of the bills and their you know, wherever they were in their path and that seemed to have stopped and that was very helpful. Not only did I use that for my own edification, but I also shared that with my constituency and with the you know, the Mason Dems because people want to know what's happening. So, that's helpful. And I also want it was helpful, but it is no longer
018happening. Um, what I did find, I cannot state enough how valuable I found it to be this year were those Friday Richmond roundups that VSBA held. That's where I knew to the minute what was happening cuz those people in the room and they're coming back and they're talking to school board members. And by the way, Miss Sutlow, they did say it is open to clerks. I did double check that for you and I forgot to tell you. Um, but it was up to the minute information in terms of where things are and it was helpful to also see what VSBA's position because sometimes we're aligned and sometimes we're not and that's helpful to know. Uh, it's so I I'd like to um, believe that there'll be a difference in the work products and the outcomes
019rather than just creating another committee. So, can somebody speak to that, please? And I'd like to go back. >> Yeah. I think that would be part of the work plan that's proposed and then adopted by the board. And as adopted by the board, it then has the weight of the board behind it as opposed to individual board member expectations for work. So, if the plan includes, in addition to the meetings we've kind of talked about, that we're going to have uh weekly updates or whatever it happens to be, whatever the board decides, then that's what will happen. Okay, thank you. And lastly, um just speaking a little bit to Mr. Moon's point, I would love for there to be some more structured engagement, particularly the things that are happening in Richmond that are so fast
020and furious. I I would not want for there not be a structured opportunity to say, "Hey, this bill has been amended in this way. What does the board think?" So, I would look forward for that to be structured rather than just being reflective of one or two board members' um positions. Thank you, Mr. McElveen. >> [clears throat] >> Uh thank you so much. Um I think this is um a good and interesting idea. Over the years, we've certainly had our issues with getting feedback into the system in time for it to make any make substantial impact. Um and we've also had issues getting it on the getting conversations on the calendar as a board, and I think this would provide a mechanism to do that. Um I would like to hear from Mr. Molloy since
021he's here and taking a big gulp right now. Um but uh uh if you could come to the table uh >> He's literally drinking something. Yeah, right. Literally taking a big gulp. Right, yeah. Yeah. Um so, uh if you could um just share your thoughts on this and how from your perspective it would be operationalized, just knowing what you know of the Board of Supervisors process. Uh good morning, everybody. Um I mean, I think anything that facilitates communication is a positive. Um I think having a a structure in place where there's clear expectations in terms of feedback from the board, feedback from staff, and then finding a way to marry that together um is definitely a you know, a positive a positive thing. Uh I will echo the comments that several board members have worked
022with. Most of you um in some form or another as a legislative liaison, and it does really it varies by uh by the member that uh by the board member that serves as a legislative liaison. Um it kind of people make the the position their own, which um you know, is is always a good thing, but there isn't necessarily a strict um continuity, I think was the word that uh Mr. McDaniel mentioned. Um the one thing that I would I would caution is, and I think Mr. Moon brought this up, is the speed at which things happen in Richmond. Off-session is one, you know, it's is a completely different things, but during session, you know, we are meetings start 7:00 a.m., meeting go until 7:00 p.m. They're you know, meetings happen daily. Uh things happen
023incredibly rapidly. So, to get that feedback, and it may very well be that the committee is a great way to have that feedback come back to um the team in Richmond um more quickly. Um I think it it definitely has the potential potential to do that. But it as I said, just having that line of communication and having clear expectations, I think is going to be helpful. Um so, how would you envision the process to work during session? I know in the old days, we would kind we would get you on camera get you on the phone as part of a work session or you'd have to drive up from Richmond and brief us and drive back. Um what would would you envision like a virtual meeting where you would zoom in zoom in with
024us or >> I I I think technology helps. Uh you know, in it it before we had technology, it was a matter of you had to physically be present. Um that is certainly one way it can be done. Uh it's I think the I think the Board of Supervisors and their legislative staff, um they do come back physically for some meetings. Now, I will tell you that I think that they are cutting back on the number of meetings on the the county side. They're not necessarily meeting with Um so, again, these would be details that would be fleshed out as part of, you know, the committee work if if you do uh as a board decide to to set up a legislative committee, um you'd figure out the the cadence of those meetings. Um but
025it's certainly something that could be doable. Great. Um thanks. That's it for now. Thank you, Ms. St. John Cunningham. Um so, I want to thank um Mr. Frisch and Mr. McDaniel for bringing this up. I I really think that this is something that is important um for us to do, particularly when you start looking at the things that we're going to be facing in the future. And as quick moving as things [clears throat] are, we also have to be nimble and quick moving. Definitely affects our students and funding for our schools. Um I really appreciate this idea because I think this is where the board should be spending their time um instead of a lot of operational stuff that happens down on the ground. Uh I think job to make sure that we're making sure
026our schools are adequately funded and looking at what's happening at the state and federal level and even at the local level with our Board of Supervisors. Um I think that it's incumbent of us to take these steps and be the people that are the liaisons to these bodies to let them know what we need, why we need it. Um so, I love this idea. I do look forward to get this and do diving deeper into this and seeing how we can make this a stronger muscle for the board to use so that we can use the influence that we have as elected with other elected. I think that's where our time and energy during this time of fiscal crisis has to be spent because that really will have such a direct impact on if we
027can pay our teachers and if we can you know, if we can feed our kids, if we have mental health supports for them. I mean, we have all these ideas of what we want. We have a great staff that can operationalize all of that if they funding. So, I really support this idea wholeheartedly and really want to look at how we can strengthen this muscle. Thank you, Dr. Anderson-Purcell Back. Okay. Any additional questions regarding the legislative committee? Gentlemen, do you have anything else you want to share or say? What are next steps? Next steps. No, I I don't remember. It It's kind of new when we just talked about next steps. It's kind of a little bit of a follow-up to what I asked before. Will there be some solicitation of ideas in terms of
028the structure from the full board regarding what the processes would be. I think uh Ms. Merian having served as the um state liaison for a couple of years will be very helpful in this regard. And I've got some thoughts from the federal side as well. Um is that the expectation that we can gather some input from the board rather than get giving some input while it so it can be constructed rather than giving input after it's constructed, which tends to be a little bit harder. Yes. Prior to. The forum consensus is number one. The Fairfax County School Board agrees to consider action on the amendments to the governance manual and the creation of a school board legislative committee as detailed in the forum topic item on BoardDocs before the board's July reorganization for the 2026-27
029school year. So, we have consensus on that? Yes. Looks like everybody in the room is in agreement. And so, we look forward to seeing that come to fruition. Who are we Oh, we're not delegating this to anybody else to construct. It's just for this to be part of the July Yes. Okay. Yes. Well, to be clear, the forum topic has an amendment in it for the governance manual. And this says that the board will vote on that before the July reorganization. So, perhaps we put it on as new business. Maybe by Thursday, and then I'll you guys can talk about that in chairs. Perfect. Thank you. We will do that. Sorry to get ahead of myself there, Chair Anderson. Okay. I think this concludes that particular forum topic. No, since it's all forums, you can
030actually just go straight to the next forum topic since we do forums as a whole. All right. So, >> Ms. Lady, can I ask an unrelated question? Okay. Uh if this were to pass, now we will have six board committees. And I know a couple of years ago we increased the number of persons on these committees. Um I I would like for there to be a review of that because the 12 of us can only be stretched so far across these six committees before it becomes untenable. Um I think we went from four to five, and for quorum purposes, and I'll be honest, in the committees that I've been part of, it doesn't seem to have supported kind of that um I guess the intent. I just want to put it in the room for
031us to reconsider the number of members that are serving on each of these committees because now there will be six, and there's only 12 of us. And again, there's just so many bodies to go around. Okay. I'm going to call on uh Chair Anderson for reply. Um thanks. The only thing that I want to say here is that this isn't actually creating another position on the board because these two positions are already they would be replacing the two positions that are already in place. So, I'm not necessarily sure that this adds um anything more than the structure of being able to call the the committee as a committee of the whole, but the the chair and vice chair would still be the two people that are already tasked with that particular assignment. I think that
032looking at whether or not we want to have we want to continue with the number of people on each committee that we have. I will say from my discussions with the clerk team, I do think it helps us make sure that we have quorum because you if two people are gone, we can still hold the meeting. So, um but I think that that is something that we can ask back to look at again. Thank you, Mr. Frisch. Nope. Okay. So, we will now move to the second forum topic, creation of the educational technology review committee, and I will call on Mr. Frisch and Mr. Dana to get us started. Good morning. Thank you very much. Um I uh this is the my forum topic that I've helped lead. So, forgive me if I um overstep
033or misstep or so forth, but um this this was a topic that was really big for me and I'm really grateful for Mr. Frisch's help with everybody else who gave inputs on it. Um I'll just start by saying it I think at the risk of bringing up um bad memories, I I think we find ourselves in a similar situation as we faced during COVID where we are in unprecedented times again. And what I wouldn't give to be back in precedented times. Um but in lieu of that, you know, we're faced with the with with AI, with um technology in classrooms becoming ubiquitous, and so I think that a very um kind of nuanced thoughtful approach. And I'll just say, you know, um been on the board now um a month and a half and and
034one one of the reasons that got me interested in serving this role was tech in classrooms, right? Not because I think it's all bad, but because I just think we need to be very intentional and purposeful about it. And you know, I've got a um a first grader and a fourth grader. My fourth grader got his first one-to-one laptop and was taking it home and um you know, I was a little taken aback when he was on the bus playing, you know, random games and so forth, right? So, I think from having conversations with almost everybody here and members of the community, um principals, teachers, educators, everybody, there's a lot of consensus that we need to take a good hard look at this. Um and you know, what what gets excited what gets me excited
035about this this approach um is that we will have everybody at the table, right? To help inform that discussion because it's a very nuanced discussion um when we talk about using technology in classrooms. And I know, you know, for example, a child that um is diabetic and uses a smartphone um to get notifications that um when his blood sugar is low and and it'll send a notification to his teacher and to the school health staff, um even to his parents. And and that's something that I I I don't know what could be replaced, right? I know there's a lot of kids that use um AAC devices to to communicate. Um there are kids who I have a friend of mine who's has a son that has autism and is difficult in social situations and uses
036an app on his phone to be able to help generate questions to be able to have better conversations with his with his colleagues. Um I also recognize now that we've we've um introduced more technology in the classroom, we have more data to understand what's working and what's not. And so, um like I said, there's there's a lot of nuance here. Um it lends itself well to a to a committee of a broad cross-section of our community and of educators um to look at and discuss. Um you know, today it's AI in classrooms, tomorrow it could be wrote and that nobody's proposing this, but tomorrow it could be robots in classrooms, right? And and this kind of committee would be nimble enough, I think, to respond and and provide guidance and recommendations on those sorts of
037things. So, um I will hand off to my colleague Mr. Frisch to talk a little bit about why we're recommending this specific approach. Thank you. [clears throat] Um so, Tom and I began uh Mr. Dana and I began talking about this a couple weeks before he was sworn in and um I think at least initially we planned on advocating for something like this in the policy. Um and eventually we met with um you know, our districts are right next door to each other. We went we met with constituents together to talk about various issues including the committee um uh approach. And during that conversation, one piece of feedback kept coming up which was, how can this move more quickly? How can we get this going now? And and so we took that feedback back and
038thought a bit about how do you get this happening without disrupting the policy work? Um and so ultimately where we came to was a two-pronged strategy which is the the requested action here today, which is one uh directing the superintendent to stand this committee up, and number two, directing governance to memorialize this approach uh in the policy that it's working on. Uh and that way the committee can start having an impact as soon as humanly possible. I think we we say as you know, getting this going as as soon as practicable. Um and it force the work of the policy to complete prematurely. Uh I think good work is being done on that front and we're getting there. Um but I think if we act on this today, um that work for standing up the
039committee can begin immediately. Um board members can go about the work of appointing their representatives to the committee, um and they can get to work so that impact is felt as soon as humanly possible. Um I think it's important to ensure that this work is baked into the operational fiber of the school division, um so that uh you know, um the objectives are felt and acted upon uh after due consideration of um a you know, developmental appropriate uh use of whatever the topic happens to be, whether it's devices, whether it's AI, whether it's other things. Um uh and then um that the board has oversight over this process um to ensure that it's functioning as we expect. Um I think ultimately this comes down to a certain amount of trust, right? Um for some, the
040school division has to re-earn trust. Uh for others, um there is trust there and they want to be involved in that process. Um and so we've got to marry all of that with our North Star being the success of all students um and ensuring that the choices that are made are operationally sound, but also um you know, that they're uh that there's efficacy. That what we are saying these things are being used for are resulting in those things. Um if they're not, then we need to consider um why we're doing them in the first place. Um so um I I've appreciated the conversations I've had with with colleagues and with Tom and with the community. Um and I look forward to this work moving forward as as soon as humanly possible. Thank you, Dr. Anderson.
041Thank you. I appreciate you all forward and I want to say I've been scooped by you all because I was having those same conversations with Ms. Marion and governance um even um prior to the committee really start to to the AI work. I was just planning on letting the policy kind of work its way through a little bit, um but nevertheless, I I'm very supportive of this because one, it will give voice to what our community has been wanting. Um but I do have a couple of questions because I talked to you about this yesterday, Mr. Frisch. I understand this would be a superintendent committee. And at current, the board does not have any oversight into the superintendent's committees. And the superintendent committees are closed meetings. It's not as if anybody can just walk in,
042they're not posted. This is a space where our fam where our community, it's not just the people who sit around the table, but others want to hear that discussion. And so, the only way that that happens if it's a board committee. I and I don't see anything wrong with keeping everything as is, all of these individuals that are here, but making it a school board advisory committee so we have two things. One, we have a board member that is part of um that is a liaison to that committee because that's what happens when it's an advisory committee. And two, it's a meeting that's open to the public. If our goals, as just stated, is to either rebuild trust or to deepen trust, the only way that's going to happen is if it's more transparently done.
043If it's done behind closed doors, I don't think we're going to get the most bang for our buck. And I would be remiss if I didn't hear that given that this board has eliminated now three school board advisory committees, this will also lend and signal to the community that, "Hey, you know what? We still want to hear from you. We're still trying to do the work that is transparent." Es- especially on this topic where there's so much vetted interest. And it would be great, again, if this committee is an open committee, and by open I mean people just can come to the gallery and sit and watch, then they could be very clear of what do I communicate to the person who is representing my area. Keeping it behind closed doors the way that our
044superintendent committees are right now does not achieve that. So, I will be highly supportive if we could pivot it into some sort of open space. Whether we're saying that this is a board committee so that a board member sits on it and it's open because that's what has to happen without FOIA, or find some other way to make it a completely open committee. Otherwise, I'm I can't be supportive of it. Um uh to address those topics. Number one, um the forum discusses the board's oversight function. Um on the the question of openness, um um it is important to bake this into the operational DNA of the school division, and this is how we already deal with issues of instruction. And so, I think it's important that that's how this is structured. Additionally, I have zero
045doubt that the members of our community that we appoint to this committee um will be speaking their minds uh both in these meetings and outside of these meetings. And if if if I were to appoint somebody to this committee to this committee and I was not hearing back from them on a regular basis about how it's going, it would be on me to ensure that I'm getting the appropriate feedback and acting upon it. Um you know, the board can send topics for the agenda to the superintendent. Um and, you know, not every aspect of this is fleshed out, but some of, you know, the uh grayer areas I think can be in the policy long as the policy aligns with uh the overall structure that we've articulated in the forum topic. Thank you for um
046your comments, but respectfully, I do disagree because the superintendent already has all of these people already at her behest to do this work. It she does not need us to convene any of these individuals outside of um the the parent piece, I'm sorry, the community positions that would be appointed by board members. Um even with parents, I'm sure she has conversations with parents through the um the family groups and uh and um what do you call it? The community conversations. I I I don't agree. Again, if we're trying to make sure that our community is engaging in this, let's give them the opportunity to truly engage. It's just making the meeting open. It's not changing any of these, but it's being able to have somebody sit in that gallery and hear firsthand, "Oh, this is
047what the chief of schools thinks about this. Oh, this is what the chief technology officer thinks about this." Rather than having it be given to them second hand. Um and I I don't see the reason why it has to be closed. Good afternoon. Thank you. I pretty much concur with Dr. Anderson has said. I was looking I was reviewing. I'm sorry that, you know, Mr. Dana, we didn't get to uh connect yesterday. Uh I really wanted to have a conversation uh about when I was looking at the board oversight, wasn't that clear what the board's roles were because if it is superintendent's just like other committee she may have to support her work, then we don't really have that oversight. Our oversight is a superintendent as opposed to this committee's work, which is under to
048support superintendent. So, uh I was more or less even thinking about creating a technology subcommittee for the school board uh at being such of importance these days with AI and digital devices and so much you know, so much concerns being raised and etc. In order to properly respond and address address those concerns and questions from community, but I mean, this is not the board committee, but at least at least involving community members, which is absolutely critical at this juncture. Not that we are trying to second guess superintendent's recommendation or our staff's work, but community has vested interest in these and then reflecting, you know, their their input in our work is important. So, this has to be so much of our advisory committees. Advisory committee, they will always work with a superintendent. Always will do.
049Uh so, more of a transparency uh I think we we won't I don't know what will be lost having more transparency. That's where my question is. I think one thing that we've heard repeatedly from people in the community is that the advisory committee process is frustrating. And one thing that we've heard from parents on this subject is they don't simply be advisors. Thank you, Mr. McDaniel. On [clears throat] that note, um yeah, my line of questioning is kind of around the the public feedback, the gathering of that feedback, the structure of the committee and how that would integrate. So, I guess my question is to board of done very simply, how would we infuse with the current structure as proposed of more of like the curriculum advisory type of an operational committee, how would we
050infuse any type of public feedback into that? Is that a part of this work? Is that a part of this proposal to to have some of that public feedback? And I guess for staff, perhaps Dr. Reed, do your current committees that are of a similar model that are more internal, more operational, do they um have a mechanism for soliciting that public feedback or do you have a mechanism for soliciting public feedback? Well, I think, you know, what the discussion really is revolving around a board advisory committee, which is outlined in the governance manual, which, you know, I'm really looking forward to those reports that are coming up in the next month or so. At the end of the year, we have a number of committees that have worked really hard all year and involved community
051uh input and feedback. And I'm, like I said, looking forward to hearing those, and I know staff respond to those as well um at the end of the year. That's a separate uh process or a separate track, if you will, from what we would characterize as more operational committees, curriculum committees, that type of thing. And those are usually stood up. They're not standing committees forever, but they're stood up in the moment of um introspection or need, right? Like the math committee, uh we stand up to be responsive to changing math standards, for example, and so forth. So, I can see the benefit of a superintendent advisory committee on this topic because the standards are evolving rather rapidly um and the technology is, both Mr. Dana and Mr. Frisch have pointed out in their forum topic,
052um continues to evolve rapidly. So, um I do think it's timely to have a committee. I do think that the committee should indeed hear from our community, our parents, our families. Um I did review the structure and thought that seemed very workable. Um so, you know, I certainly support the uh the forum topic. Um I also understand the idea of board advisory committees, right? Um I think that the I think we don't want too many committees on the same topic because then we can end up going in a variety of directions and at some point they need to converge, right? To become operational. Um so, I regardless, um there are multiple ways for the community to give feedback even if it was an internal committee um or a board advisory committee. Um I don't know
053currently how many community members come to observe or be a part of board advisory committees. Maybe that's a good question to ask when they come this spring um to share their reports cuz I think that that's, you know, I hope people are taking advantage of that opportunity. Okay, thank you. Um That was all. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Meren. Yes, I'm pleased to discuss instructional technology anytime, any day. So, thank you for bringing it. I appreciate the acknowledgement that the policy is being worked on, and I'm happy to discuss it and put more things in motion and in parallel tracks. That's wonderful. Um so, I have a few comments that are procedural for the board's work, some history, and some questions about what's uh proposed. So, a simple one is just for the list of
054people included, I would suggest also the Title I office. And more than just, you know, one or more high school students, I think really putting a good amount of students on that will be helpful because they are the ones who are really going to lead us. So, um I'd want to beef that up um and figure out how to do that, whether it's through the student advisory council. Um I think the biggest thing I want to say again is like this is not business as usual. We may have had an advisory advisory We do have advisory committees that advise us. We have curriculum review committees. We have policies. We are in uncharted territory, so I think we need to be more open-minded about how to do things differently. So, um you know, I don't want
055to just do thing like like the comment about this needs to be open to the public, absolutely. This is not a conversation that can remain within the foyer restrictions. I mean, there's no question in my mind. Uh that's what the the people want. And that's what I want. The board oversight, you know, what are we really seeking here? So, if you've ever followed the curriculum review advisory committee work, it's called together when there is an opportunity to purchase curriculum or um make curricular changes. So, for instance, when we did the literacy review committee, the call out, board members are on a rotating schedule of like half of us get to assign someone to the committee, and the next rotation around the other half of the board does. It's filled with staff. The um developers of
056the curriculum come in and present it to the the members there, and then the committee makes a recommendation to the board. And then the board publicly hears that proposal, and then we vote on that curriculum purchase. I'm okay with this committee filling that work. That is very different than a board advisory committee, which is them meeting with FCPS staff, delivering us a report that we do what we may with it. I think as been said the superintendent has a number of places to get feedback and I was remembering when I first got on the board under Scott Brabrand being like, "Hey, how many committees are you What membership do you have?" And we pulled together a list of all of the advisory committees the superintendent has convened and also all the memberships that they had
057and I think we should do that as well. I'd like to know just as an aside what boards our esteemed superintendent sits on and what circles you know, she's in as well as where she's getting her input from the collection of all these different task force. I think you know, this conversation and I could have a go back, but we need to be intentional of what are we deciding here? Are we deciding that the governance committee needs to be clear what to codify because we're not yet and maybe we keep talking we'll get clear on what we want, but right now I don't see that we're all on the same page just yet and I will take a go back, please. Thank you. Okay. Ms. St. John Cunningham. Thank you. I appreciate [clears throat] this
058being brought forward. It is timely and it is fast moving. Um I just want to say that in in looking at this my staff and I went back and looked at um the superintendent's EL 12 report on technology which the school board approved in January and there's a lot of information. There's a lot of things that are already going on and I think that part of the issue of this is not so much transparency as communication. Getting the communication out to the community because there there are a lot of good things happening and it's all there. We just have to look at it or we have to disseminate it and as a division we have to disseminate it. As school board members we have to disseminate it. Um I think that that's an important distinction
059to to look at. I do think that we do need a structured and reliable mechanism and I think it should be different than the advisory committee boards because we get that at the end of the year. We get a report at the end of the year. This is moving quickly. We need to be nimble. We need to be flexible. We need to be having experts at the table, community at the you know, our parents at the table the way this is outlined. I do like the suggestion of including title one schools and more students there. But I really do think that what where we're falling down as a division is the communication. I think that there's a lot going on and it's just not in this area. The fact of the matter is there's a
060lot going on with this whole division and it's like it just is what is the flavor of the day. If it's transportation, there's a lot going on there, but it's not being put out. It's not being pushed out. You know, if it's meals, it's not being pushed out and I think that we get in that trap. Um so I just want to have one one question because we have the newly launched AI website that has a lot of information and it has information on the student guide to AI and the FCPS AI principles. However, when we went to that we couldn't copy or download that and I think that's really important information for our parents and our students to have. So I do have a question for Mr. Sethi about if he can explain what's
061going on there. Yeah, no, thank you for that question. That website is still under development. It is kind of release as a early model. We have some updates with our parent quad meetings where we plan to release additional ways to communicate with the families on the topic of AI. And our goal is to create simple pathways. Right? If it's an app on your phone, you should be alerted when a notification comes out. We want multilingual messaging to go out so it's done in multiple modes and that's what we're striving to get to very quickly. So you'll see a lot of this coming together over the summer and for next school year we'll have clear communication lines going out from those. And how often are you communicating with our office of communication because I think that
062maybe we're in silos and we're not getting that information out to the people that have to be pushing it out because there was so much information and in terms of you know, reviewing the the superintendent we have that that is one of the ELs that we have that we already approved in January. So that mechanism already exist of what is the superintendent doing? How's it all being done? But anyway, I just went off. Yeah, no, we would certainly the goal was to kind of build the resource so it has information in there and then start working with the communications team over the summer to get them out to families through the various channels they have and be able to use that information in meaningful ways for next school year. Okay, thank you. No, I appreciate
063that. I just want to emphasize of what is going on right now that is not being hidden. It just is not being communicated and I think that that's where we're falling short and we have to focus on that. Thank you. Mr. McElveen. Uh thank you and thank you both for bringing this forward. I think it's very clear that we need to get moving on this as quickly as possible. So we appreciate you starting the process and coming up with such a solid proposal. Um so my first question's for Dr. Reed. How would you envision this group interacting with the think tank that's being Would that think tank present to this group? Would it um Would there be any any any I think the the think tank is really a workforce development group which is going
064to have a very different focus. Um it's not going to be so much about education in the classroom. It's more so about the future of AI in the region and nationally and that work I think it's going to be important more so um as a workforce development goal but rather than what are we going to be doing in third grade for example instructionally which I see this committee very much so involved directly in the day-to-day what's happening in our classrooms. And I think uh Ms. Meron's comment about adding more students, I think that classroom experience and how we shape that is really important and that would be fundamentally I think one of the primary drivers for this advisory committee. Um I think there's always a linkage between the two. Workforce development will always inform what
065we do instructionally, but does have if you will a different um maybe a different focus. Okay, great. Um that's helpful. Thank you. And then I agree with my colleagues who have stated that there should be a public-facing piece of this, right? I think that is indeed what our community is demanding. And then finally just in terms of membership I do also agree that we need more more students on this. I think generally we've had the student member appoint someone to our advisory committees although this is a different structure. So I would suggest that, but I would also beef up um just generally the number of student representatives. Thanks. Thank you. Not seeing any other new placards. I'm going to take a turn. Really appreciate Mr. Frisch and Mr. Dan for bringing this forward. Being on
066the governance committee I definitely see the urgency around creating this. Um I happen to agree wholeheartedly with how it's been presented in terms of how it should be structured. Um it basically is about instruction. You know, I'm currently getting emails about what's not in our social studies curriculum. Um and I've got to communicate that with staff, ask questions. You know, I've gotten questions about other parts of our curriculum. Um but that's operational. Um you know, some of us you know, worked years in school systems, but we're not instructional specialists. Um I also appreciated one of my colleagues sharing some input from students at uh at a high school. But I also found the student input short-sided when it came to teachers use of AI because they're just not aware of how it's helping kids access
067learning especially students with a disability. So I support it. I agree we need more communication. I see this similar to um sort of like the Brack committee that we got the reports out of. Um and we have to do good job with with communication. I definitely agree with my colleagues. We need more more student representation. But I also feel like if it's if it's not structured as a superintendent's committee, I don't see all these people listed as attending. And I don't we won't get the feedback often enough. Like this is a moving like right now it's moving as we sit here. Um and we need to be on top of it and we need the experts at the table and it needs to be structured and I do have the trust in our system because
068I also know that I'll have the opportunity to appoint someone which is very important and I will be checking in with them and then utilizing my newsletter to communicate out with the work of that of that committee is doing. So I support the forum topic as presented. Um All right, I see Mr. Frisch has put his placard up. Yes, thank you. I appreciate the conversation thus far. Uh >> [clears throat] >> Dr. Reed, do you see any drawback in making these meetings public? No, sir. So we could make the meetings public? Yes, sir. All right. Well, I would be supportive of that and that could be worked into the policy um as it's developed. Um On the question of students I agree. But I'm not sure the structure or the number. So I'd like the
069work to begin and then if like when the policy gets constructed we decide, well, we want SAC to do it and it'll be this many students then perhaps we figure out a transitional phase where that part of the policy gets incorporated. As for title one, I agree. I apologize for the oversight. I think that's an important element to include in the conversation for a number of reasons. Um you know, without objection, I'd like to include them on that. Um because I think it's important. Do you see any drawback in including the title one office? No, sir. So, um anyways, I appreciate the conversation. I What I appreciate most is that we're all chomping at the bit to get this work started. So, Thank you. Mr. Dixon. So, I'm here also to support this forum topic
070and moving forward with it. I think technology is the most important factor right now in education and moving forward because of the all the changes happening in this field. So, it has to be a very dynamic uh committee, obviously, and has to really kind of think the futuristic like what's what's happening in next 5 years, 10 years in in technology space. And And I think it's a it's a right time to do it cuz we are at that tipping point with technology. So, I appreciate you bringing this forward. So, I'm I'm fully supportive of that. And title one office definitely needs to be involved and we do have to bring equity in all our discussions. Thanks. Thank you, Dr. Anderson, for a quick go back. Thank you. I'm just going to run through the list
071of my questions here and statements. One thing that I want to put in the room that if the advisory committees are not working, the onus is on us to fix it. Because I know what the feedback has been. It's been what we've heard from folks before we got on the board many years ago and it still continues. It's cuz I just heard it from my representatives last week when I had my meetings with all of them. We give you guys recommendations, then we hear nothing back. We don't know what you're doing with it. Staff gives you a response. So, what does that mean? I think we've been The first board that I was on, at least the first year or so, there was a little bit more activity about bringing forward some of the recommendations
072to um as as motions for staff to carry forward. But that only lasted a couple of years and then it just we hear it in June and by the time we hear these nine committees, it's all like swimming in our heads and then we start the school year all over again and we don't ever look back. So, that's on us to fix. So, I wanted to raise that. Two, these are the committees in which I know there've been people in the galleries cuz I know cuz I've been in the galleries. ACSD, FLECAC, FPAC, as well as MSAOC and title one. People come and they have sat. I'm not saying it's 100 people, but people come and they sit. But we know that people are really interested in this. If they know this conversation is going
073on, they're going to make sure that they come in and be part of it. Um there is a lot going on and that that Ms. St. John Cunning just shared. And I think that speaks to what my points were. There's all of these things going on and yet we have that clamor for the community part to participate. If you're making the amendment for us to make this a public meeting, I don't care who runs it. My next suggestion was going to be could we not have it be called advisory so you could have all the teeth you're looking for the school board public. If you're saying these are going to be public meetings that are noticed and I'm sure they'll be in the evenings because there's plenty of parents then my work there is done.
074But we cannot make this inside committee. And so, I think we've moved away from that. So, I will pause here. Ms. Marin. It would be really helpful to me as governance committee chair to get clear on what we're seeking because not only are we trying to decide today, but we want to codify it. And the meeting is in 2 weeks, May 19th. So, I don't think that much is going to get done in the time to stand up this committee before then. Um you know, we mentioned a think tank. Again, not clear on where that's standing. You know, if we're really chomping at the bit as was said, then we've got to get clear on on what we we want. And do we want a committee that's going to be reviewing apps and software and
075helping us make financial decisions or decisions about purchasing? So, if we do, that's got to be crafted a little bit differently. Um you know, parents want a place to help influence decision. And unfortunately, again, this is not business as usual. So, when we say, you know, you want it just as it is, this is not really what this time calls for. I mean, to be honest, because of the way the superintendent has chosen to roll out AI, we are under a microscope. Arlington has allowed their principals to have school-based opt out of one-to-one devices for K2, something our parents are clamoring for. We have said nothing about it. The superintendent has said nothing about it. So, we absolutely This is us showing a good faith gesture to the community that we hear them. We take
076them seriously. We understand that we need to hold the superintendent accountable to making decisions to the community about how much technology, what technology, how much of the budget is being spent. I have a budget question in right now that asks for all the money we are spending from positions to devices to apps. All of that is happening because the division level conversation is basically a pep rally for AI. And I'm eager to hear our experts today, but we're still not talking about devices and classrooms and parent input. So, that's why this committee needs to allow the public visibility and influence on us. So, as governance chair, I it would be helpful for you, Mr. Dan and Mr. Frisch, to help me know what to bring to the committee on Thursday, May 19th, so we could
077codify what you're seeking or what the consensus is. Yes, yes, I know Mr. Frisch is on the on the committee, but I will share. We'll have a lot of discussions about that. And I want to point out as well I had in my mental notes, but just not my written notes to to give credit to all the work that you all have done. And I appreciate all the efforts you've made not just include people committee, but outside the committee as well in these discussions. So, actually and duly noted. All right, guys. I see more and more placards going up. So, um and we're over time by 5 minutes and have a full day. So, if there's something you absolutely have to say, keep your placard up. I'm going to give you a minute. Okay, Mr.
078Moon. I don't know if I have to say something I absolutely have to say, but I wanted to thank you know, Mr. Frisch and Dr. Dr. Reed you know, willing to consider this to be open to public, which is all our support wholeheartedly. Our second point is uh to the uh forum topic requestors, how do you envision this review committee's work will affect other discussions the board is embarking on including AI policy and and and and digital [snorts] device use time etc. Are we pausing them or Uh no, I don't think the policy or this are pausing the work, so to speak. In terms of how it informs the work, um you know, this is different. It's modeled after the basal instructional review committees, but it's different because it is not does not have an
079expiration date on it, right? So, we are appointing members um for 1-year terms. They can be reappointed over and over and over again. Many of us have people that we do that with for various committees. So, that's different. The other thing that's different about it, I think, is um the ability for the you know, the instructional review committees are kind of detailed in regulation, not in policy. Um and this is taking a hybrid approach. It'll be detailed by the superintendent in operationalizing it and it will be enshrined in the governance committee's work on the policy, which will eventually come to the board. In terms of what's articulated here, I think we do a a decent job of providing context of what the forum is hoping will be in the policy. That does not cover every
080bit and I also um [clears throat] my expectation if this moves forward today is that this will be public. Um and so, I think that will be and you know, baked into the policy. The question about the number of students would be baked into the policy, perhaps. Um uh and eventually the board will weigh in on that. And if what governance comes up with falls short or isn't exactly where the board wants it to be, um then the normal process for policy approval includes amendments and it'll go from there. Um So, I think we've tried to take as big a picture look at this as possible getting into the weeds and have to begin the work um without prejudicing or not prejudicing is not the right word. Without um getting in the way of governance's
081ability to to to finish its policy cuz there's a lot more to the policy than just this part. Um and so that this can start now. Like we have governance coming up this month. What if the policy is not finished at that meeting or the meeting after? I'm not saying I'm trying not I don't believe in speaking into existence, but I know others do. So, I apologize to those who believe that that's possible. Um but um and I actually think we made a lot of progress at the last meeting on two fronts. So, knock on any actual real wood in the room. Um but um so, I'm hopeful. Um but at least we can begin that work because even if governance approves it, then it's new business. That maybe there's a work session. I don't
082know, but there's a approval process after governance does the work as well. Um so, maybe we get it done in June, but at least we'd have a 2-month head start on getting this policy off or this committee off the ground. Thank you. Um Mr. McElveen. Thanks. 20 seconds. So, um just to follow up on what Ms. Meron said that we don't have time to talk about this. Um I do appreciate you uh bringing up the Arlington example. Um and as governance moves into finalizing the policy, I do hope that you will consider um uh eliminating devices for K to 2. The principals I've talked to are supportive. Um I think that there's community support for that. So, thank you. Thank you, Ms. St. John Cunning. So, just very quickly because our advisory committees I was
083at the MSAOC committee and this thing of like why don't you take our suggestions? Why don't you do it? I was part of MSAOC when it was just MSA and we went through some of the things. It takes time to get things done and there were some of us with historical knowledge that said, "You guys have advocated for this, this, and this and this, this, and this has happened." So, what they're going to start doing is going back and looking historically at what has happened and sometimes it doesn't happen immediately because it takes time. We know it takes funding, how you operationalize it. So, I think when you don't have a continuity of people on these committees, they feel frustrated. But the fact of the matter is that there is impact and at that meeting
084several of us could say, "I was on the committee when we were advocating for this and it has happened now." And you know, that was a long time ago. So, those are those things that we have when it was MSA. So, I I just want to let the advisory committees know that things do happen. Their work is not in vain. Sometimes it just takes longer than what any of us have patience for, but that's just the nature of the beast that where we work on. I just want to thank them for what they do. Thank you. Um and I happen to agree with you. Um So, they have a forum consensus uh number two. The Fairfax County School Board agrees to the following recommendations. Direct the superintendent to establish an educational technology review committee, ETRC,
085which will hold public meetings and be consistent with the purpose, charge, scope, structure, and membership outlined in the forum topic on BoardDocs and to begin convening the ETRC at the earliest predictable time and direct the governance committee to incorporate and formalize these expectations into board policy as part of its ongoing work, ensuring that the ETRC's purpose, charge, scope, structure, and membership are codified as detailed in the forum topic on BoardDocs. Do we have consensus on this? I do want to say thank you, Mr. Frisch, for adding the public cuz you know that was a thing that was very, very important to me and I appreciate your flexibility. All right. So, it looks like we have consensus on the board. Everyone Point point of order. >> Save point of order. It's a consensus means everybody agrees.
086No, consensus is a majority. No, it's not. It we've we've gone around this before. Consensus This is what we're supposed to do is consensus making and I I agree with the committee, but I this is not a point of order. It's a comment that I again as governance chair want to understand. There is not agreement on exactly what this committee is supposed to do unless everyone is exactly agreeing to this, which means they're not doing the curriculum piece because Well, maybe I'm misunderstanding. I guess I just want to be sure I understand what like that's going to function that the superintendent's going to be bringing running this like a curriculum committee, which is a probably a lot of work, which is fine. Yeah, I think it's a lot of work. Okay. So, okay, then maybe
087I am just pleasantly surprised. It just didn't sound like there was appetite for the comments I made. I heard some sighing and eye rolling. So, I just want to be sure that I think Mr. Frisch summarized what he believes governance should do in relation to this. We could go back and watch it again. Okay. And then really quickly, Mr. Men, we've got to shut this down. We're 15 minutes behind and we have guests coming. Thank you. Uh Ms. Meron, if you if you take a look at the forum topic request, the outcome of this forum topic is two folds and it one and two. That I believe that that's where the consensus is. So, this is going to go to a governance committee to reflect this. Yes, Mr. Men, but also do we usually direct
088the superintendent to stand up a committee from a forum? I mean, this forum is not a public vote. It I guess we've done it. I guess again, I'm just trying to understand. This is a brand new thing. I don't want to hold it up. I'm Mr. Frisch. >> So, when I thought about the different May I May I whether we normally do that or not. I think there was I think you know, whether you say consensus, unanimity, what agreement, general agreement, it's a giving those are two tasks superintendent and governance committee. It will eventually come back to us for the final decision. Okay. I I just also still have a hard time expecting the superintendent to stand something up before the governance committee has put it in policy. This is how we end up in
089jams of confusion when it's not in policy. A forum topic is not a directive. Well, just from my perspective, the forum topic has always had those boxes at the end that define the desired action. And so, we debated on what the desired action was um and landed on these two approaches with two different boxes. Um I think that the forum is fairly clear in terms of what the expectation is. Um and if there are enhancements to that by governance, [clears throat] um that's part of the policy making work that takes place and the superintendent, just as anything that changes, will have to adapt to those changes. Um but at the basis, like the bare bones, like if we did nothing to adjust it, it would have to take the confines of what the board has
090just provided consensus on and even then it would still have to be adopted by the board. But at the very minimum, this is let's say that the board was mired in disagreement on the policy for the next 6 months. I'm not trying to speak anything into existence existence. The work would be continuing. The committee would be up and running as the board has just weighed in. So, that's kind of where we are and I'm happy to talk about it in more detail at at governance um and bring language for the policy that I think is aligned aligns with it. I'd like to just say it's concerning that the policy seems to be the secondary level of work. That is our work. Forum is great. Let's do it, but the intention is that this policy will
091get approved by the end of this school year and the next governance meeting is May 19th and that's the only scheduled one. So, let's put our money where our mouth is and do both. I'm in. So, thank you for all the allowance of extra time. I just need clarification. Do you wish me to start the committee formation now or wait till the policy is completed? >> provided consensus for the forum as written. So, move forward with beginning the committee now? Wait till the policy is completed. >> Correct. >> Okay. Yes, sir. Ms. Men, are you a yes on the consensus now? Yes, I will be a yes. And can I also ask, will there be language that we can have because part of this committee, just to help expedite what the superintendent's putting together, is
092for us to appoint an individual. I'd love to know if you had some standard language for us to pull. I mean, otherwise, I'm happy to do it on my own. So, typically, the superintendent provides information to the board for how the uh when they they'd like the appointments made by and general language for the soliciting. So, Okay. All right, folks. Thank you. Forum topic is concluding at 11:47 and we'll do a quick transition to get started on the next topic.