001Are we ready? >> This March 4th, 2026 regular meeting of the Fairfax County School Board Administration Committee will now come to order at 4:31 p.m. I'm sorry for starting late. Uh we will now approve the minutes from the October 1st, 2025 meeting. >> I move Uh, Mr. Moon makes the motion. Is there a second? Miss Anderson. All those in favor? That's unanimous for board members present with Mr. McDaniel and Dr. Anderson absent. All right. Um, we will now talk about the schoolboard office and schoolboard member employee performance evaluations. Why don't we go ahead? And so, just to recap, this is like one of those weird um television shows that they now have where they go on hiatus and then they don't come back for two years. U and you're like, "What did happen on that
002show that I think I liked?" Well, you really enjoyed the last meeting. Um and what we approved at the last meeting was uh a revision to the evaluation calendar for specific schoolboard member and school board office staff. Essentially the people that are unique to the school board. Um a shift in the type of evaluation that we do so that it's not the generic operational evaluation that it's more specific to the jobs. Um and then we made a variety of edits to those uh those job specific evaluations and then we also uh agreed each of us took a couple people on the board to talk with and preview things for um and collect that feedback and then bring it back to the committee. And so I spoke to folks and and gathered that feedback. And the
003next item on our agenda for this portion of our work and then we're done and it's just about the implementation is agreeing that the edits that I'm going to walk through right now are good or not and we're ready to send this on to the full board for uh consideration. >> Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question? It's an overarching question about a schoolboard member specific positions. >> Two questions. uh since each board member's perhaps expectations of that his or her staff may be performing may be different from each other also also their level of expectation of their performance will be different. So my question is whether whatever we may propose to the full board for their consideration is >> they can review it and also they can modify as they see fit and then
004or are you are we going to be a recommending every board member to accept >> for the types of positions we are adopting although you'll see we had this conversation at the last meeting and language has been included to show that there's flexibility in how a board member views the evalu valuation like I'm not going to see you know item number 2.1 the same way that you will see it for your staffer and maybe item number three is super important for Sy's staffer but less important for mine because it's a talent that I have or something >> that's that's the point you know some of some of the things you know member A may not do it might not want you know step to do it whereas you know member B may think that's the
005most important thing and put in 100% of time to do that work >> well and I think you'll the language that I added in um makes that clear. Also, uh we we made the rubric a suggestion in terms of and how a board member weights things. You know, I don't think anybody's going to fault their employee for something that they're not asking them to do, right? Um so, uh they'll be able to adjust that accordingly. But on a more specific point, in making this adjustment, board members are required, even though we have no supervisorial people above us, that if they're going to do an evaluation of their employee, it has to be the evaluation that we're providing because currently that's the case as well. It's just a different evaluation. It's the very generic operational evaluation.
006So, we have to be consistent for the job type, which is why we're not touching the jobs that are common across the district that people could transfer in and out of. All right, why don't we start with um uh the auditor general's file. starting there because nobody had feedback on this and so it is unchanged except for um it's unchanged from the last meeting except for the uh adding the word sample next to performance rubric and indicators. So this remains unchanged. Nobody had feedback from colleagues. I think we're ready to move this one on to colleagues for consideration >> without objection. >> Great. Uh let's go ahead and open. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> We're voting. That was without objection. So yeah. >> All right. Uh let's do the clerk of the school board next.
007All right, this one we did have a couple items of feedback from Miss Marin. Um, so you'll see uh on the screen the first edit there was to make clear that the clerk serves at the pleasure of the body of the school board and not for one specific board member. Obviously, the governance manual indicates how that work is executed through the chair and vice chair. Uh, but this was Miss Marin's suggestion. One second. I think that's it for the introductory language. Go ahead. >> The only thing I want to note here is that per HR, um, the clerk still does need to have one supervisor amongst the board. So, >> believe that's iterated in the governance manual as well, isn't it? >> I'm not 100% sure. It may be something that Okay. According to Miss
008Brown, it is. So I just want to make sure that we acknowledge the fact that it is that we've set up as a structure that the chair is the >> that's in the governance manual. The other thing I would note is that this brings clarity to that function. Um so uh you know I think the clerk and the deputy clerks want to be helpful to all board members obviously but in terms of like major initiatives and such those are directed through the will of the board through their chair and vice chair otherwise it'd be impossible to manage anybody. uh but we all have a say in the evaluation. And so the next uh edit that Miss Marin suggested, if you scroll down to standard 2 at the end, she suggested adding 2.11 and 2.12. 2.11
009is overseas the effective onboarding of new schoolboard office and schoolboard member staff. clerk already does that in conjunction with their team, making sure that they're set up on technology and, you know, knows how to access different files and is aware of best practices for offices and how to get a newsletter out and all those types of things. The next is uh >> Mr. Chairman, >> yeah, >> I don't know why my eyesight is not getting better, but >> we grow that a little bit. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Welcome. Yeah. Yes. Uh and the second one is oversees the organized departure of schoolboard office in schoolboard member staff particularly following board turnover. Um we've just gone through this with Miss Seismore Heiser. I think the clerk and the deputies did a great
010job of helping with that transition but it's worth putting it in here. And then on standard number three uh Miss Marin suggested adding closed meetings. It was an oversight to not include that and those were the extent of her requested edits. We didn't have any other edits from anybody else. >> That's fine. Mr. Chairman, >> can we just generally give the when we are voting, can we just generally give the clerk's leave to adjust anything like hanging headers at the end of pages and things like that? And so the grammat like just sheerely grammatical and formatting error or mistakes and things like that we can update. Is that okay? >> That's fine. I mean I don't make mistakes but >> I understand or updates. Let's >> updates. It's not the prettiest document in the world.
011That's for sure. >> Uh uh anyways, there's no other edits. Uh are we fine with moving this on without objection? All right, that's unanimous. Let's move on to the deputy clerk. All right. Uh, under standard one, you'll see two added, 1.6 and 1.7. 1.6, Six. Uh, this is from Miss Marin. Monitors the board's quorum to ensure meetings occur with calendar fidelity and respect schoolboard member and staff time. Y'all already do that. I frequently get phone calls if I've not updated my quorum tracker. Um, so I have no problem with it including that. And then the second one was 1.7. We'll discuss the second one for this section is 1.7 ensures proper access to and setup of technology for virtual participation. >> Comments, Miss Anderson, Chair Anderson, >> I'm fine with 1.7. I'm concerned about the
012language in 1.6 as it is not um there is no mechanism for the clerk team to ensure that we are fulfilling our quorum tracking requirements. I will say if you wanted to say that they are responsible for ensuring accurate attendance records on the quorum tracker, I'm fine with that. >> I'd be fine. So, let me be clear. Melanie didn't give specific language. She said, "I want this feedback to be reflected, so I made it." May it may not be the clearest articulation. So, say that one more time. Basically, I want I am fine with the the clerk team being responsible for maintaining the attendance records of all board members utilizing the quorum tracker and to encourage um utilization of the quorum tracker for we can't >> I don't think it's fair to put that on
013the deputy clerks to have that be their responsibility as we have several board members that refuse to use the quorum tracker. >> Yeah. Hopefully I'm not one of those. >> Um, can you say that one more time? maintains the board's quorum tracker or maintains the board attendance records utilizing the agreed upon document or agreed upon system. Yeah, she's m the clerks are maintaining the document, not >> how are we with that? >> That >> Yes. >> I mean, that's what it's in service to, right? >> Absolutely. >> Okay. >> Uh and then the second one is about um virtual participation. Again, they already do this pretty darn >> well for me. I'm sure for others as well. Can we just put in there in in line with the board's um virtual participation resolution, please? What
014is it called? Resolution. All right. And is it called virtual participation resolution? Yeah. All right. That was the only Oh, one more. Under standard five. Uh she wanted something about uh managing AV needs at at meetings, official schoolboard meetings, not like oneoff things that board members are doing, but like closed meetings, regular meetings, etc. >> Yep. Right, >> coordinates. That's it. Any other edits? Uh, without objection, can we move this on to the board? Wonderful. All right, here's the big one. This is the director of district board operations. We have many. So, let's start with standard two. I'm going to let people read that. If we go down to standard two because it's a lot. All right. So, the overall feedback on this one, and I agreed with it, was that it sounded like they
015were going to be like a legislative uh analyst for the board member when really what the job description speaks to is just keeping the board member engaged and knowledgeable about what's happening uh legislatively at varying levels, being mindful of what's happening in the news, etc. And so uh this was the resulting edits would change this too. The director briefs their schoolboard member on various local, state and federal policy matters helping to inform the schoolboard member's thinking, advance their priorities. Uh I mean that could be everything from the budget to something happening in Washington. It's up to the board members discretion how they want to use that time. Monitors policy developments. No other changes in that one. The second one uh again changes it to policy priorities instead of legislative priorities because we don't have individual
016legislative priorities. Removes the third again updates the word policy instead of legislation. Uh updates uh you'll see repeated changes to policy considerations, priorities of the board member, etc. And then if you scroll down to so everything in that particular section has been updated to reflect that general guidance. And then if you scroll down that might be the only Yeah. And then we do have a a nugget here from uh Mr. Moon. If you go down to the very end in part five, it's been 13 years. Part five, not standard five. The very end. Yeah. All right. So, this is that language I was talking about at the top. Staff evaluations may appear different for each schoolboard member driven by their unique expectations and management style. that should provide so when people talk to each other
017as we expect them to about their evaluations I mean that's what happens in every workplace they will be knowledgeable of the fact that it's a little different for everybody. Can I ask a question? Going and I'm not trying to flip you all over the place, but back on page two with standard two, you think that the title of that standard adequately represents the task that we're asking them to critique on? Because right now, office operations and oversight has nothing to do with policy work. though like the I'm just wondering if the language of that standard doesn't necessarily match what >> it could be office policy um priorities. >> Okay. I think I think that makes more sense for what we're asking for because we're not really asking um staff our staff to create oversight for
018our policies that doesn't match. I like that better. How about office policy priorities and monitoring? Do we need the word office? That's right. It's the individual board members, which is clear in the introduction, but I mean it could just be policy priorities and monitoring. All right. Anything else on this one? We move it forward to the next uh without objection. All right, that's unanimous. Up next is the schoolboard staff aid. I believe there's one of these left. None. They're all gone. >> Brown. Do we still have one? >> Okay. So there, this is minuscule. At the very end, it includes Mr. Moon's uh uh requested language about flexibility between evaluations. All right, without objection, that is unanimous. And finally, the schoolboard staff assistant position. If you look at this one again, part five, the very
019end, it includes Mr. Moon's language. Okay. Mhm. Summarizes information into concise reports or memos for the schoolboard members use. >> Prepares background materials for meetings, hearings, and events. >> Adding what? >> Adding I'm not sure I see that that it fits with 3.3. Is it possible that we would need to add one in? It could also be added to 3.1 because that meets the need for background material. >> That's 3.3. We could say prepares background and other materials as like a more of a catch-all because that could be everything from like a memo to like a sign for the front door. Yeah. All right. Any others to Clark's evaluation just to point out. >> Okay. >> Uh at the end to toward the end I think we were giving a I don't know whether we're
020just trying to give that as an example when we were putting waiting of 1.25 25. I think that's what I saw. >> It's because it's done by all of us. It's there are for the auditor general for and for the clerk. We weigh them the same way we weigh the superintendent since it's all 12 of us doing the evaluation. >> So we doing >> the individual ones don't need waiting because only one person is doing the evaluation. >> You lost me. So we put 1.25. That's how we do the superintendent's evaluation as well >> for so to make it all together 30. >> Basically what it does it kind of balances out the the potential skew from highs and lows. >> Okay. Could you could you could you go to Clarks at the end? >>
021Yeah. very end. Okay, I'll just pretend that I understood what you said. What I said uh if he if somebody got four on everything with the waiting 1.25 that person would have gotten will get 30 points. Um, >> yes. Correct. >> Six standards and the four is the highest you can get. If you do 1.25 waiting, that becomes five points. >> That's right. >> And then just 30 points. And then if you see a ratings of scores, highly effective is this was just copied from another uh item so it would be >> I don't know what that would be but >> it would be yeah okay we will adjust this based on that yeah >> okay >> all right >> so >> can I ask a quick question it need to be 1.25 25 if
022it's just equally weighted like I guess >> yeah that was a point first point was why if it is same waiting >> the same if there's the same weight >> because the board could choose so this is the same discussion we've had about the superintendent's evaluation the board could choose to put more weight on one of the others um if they if they wanted to um >> but we couldn't because individuals >> not as individuals and so I guess because this is to be standardized across all employees. We could just state that they were equally weighted >> if that's what the board wants. Yeah. >> Well, but that's what we're suggesting. >> Yeah. We've just never done it that way for the superintendent. So, I didn't Okay. >> transpose it here. >> Um when I
023say never, I mean not forever, but the last six years. So, we can change it to one for everything, but that would be different than what we have. It probably Yes, it would. Um but uh >> I mean if you just make it equal waiting just you know make a point about that being equal waiting then we don't have to change what's below 21 through 24 but >> let's think about it if a board member never had the appetite as a board to talk about waiting different things for the superintendent. That's probably math equation that the board thinks it could never come to agreement on on what the most important things are and what things should be more or whatever. Um, do you think we just take that out of the equation for the other
024two people on our collective evaluation circuit and change it to one and then basically imply that we're not going to be waiting anything because we don't think the board is going to have the appetite for making a choice. one thing more important than the other. >> Yeah, you just would probably have to go up to the top and change it to be that five. Like Janet, can you scroll up just a little bit? >> Eliminate the waiting thing together. >> Well, you need it for the bottom like you need you need it to determine So you're saying just make the whole thing subjective because >> right >> and that's how it is for the superintendent. So in essence, what we'd be deciding, which is what we've passively already decided, is that everything has the same
025weight. That's something that we're willing to just be like by even inferring that there's waiting. It doesn't matter if we put a one or 1.25 for everything. We're saying that everything's an equal weight. So >> well, but there's two different things here. There's there's waiting and then there's scoring. So scoring I think actually helps supervisors kind of understand where they are the same way as it would for a teacher grading is that a a rubric helps keep you on track. It's just >> I'm not saying to eliminate the entire number five. I'm saying that if we don't want to do any waiting we would eliminate the part the second part there with the bullets >> and then down below the math would be changed to reflect fours right >> fives. Yeah. >> Yeah. telling the
026point I'll go I'll go with that I mean equal waiting and then let's see what how the full board reacts to that if a full board want to entertain a discussion of a waiting among different you know standards let it do it >> so we want to do that with the auditor general's evaluation as well then I'm guessing >> any of them I I would be on board with any of them that have waiting now currently that's all the same so I believe that that's all of them so if we just >> so there would be No 025s anywhere. >> No 025s which will make life easier in theory. >> Yeah. The only ones that have waiting right now are the superintendent the um >> I think that's a state issue. Is that >> it's
027not it's a guide >> but I think it was on the state >> it's on the state. Yeah. >> Yeah. I also did have one other quick question about actually this one and the district directors and staff aids. >> One second. Let me just make sure that we don't have I will clean this up before it comes to the board, but I'm just trying to reflect the edits. All right, that look good to everybody and then the auditor general without objection on that change. Mr. Chairman, I would like to give a full credit to my staff assistant. >> All right. >> For pointing that out >> who is sitting here. >> And do the same thing here. Oops. All right. Are we good? >> I just have one thing >> on the Auditor General. >>
028No. >> All right. We're not there yet. Hang on a second. >> All uh any objections on the auditor general waiting changes thing? >> All right. Go ahead. >> Okay. So, on staff assistant uh staff aid and district director. Do we want to put something in there that that again reiterates um no access to closed materials or something because we we we talk about meetings very generally um or allowed meetings or something like I just want to make sure >> somebody on no access to closed materials >> making because if I have >> that's like a >> I mean they're not supposed to have access anyway, right? No. >> And and and >> or something to only accessing materials that are appropriate like I don't I just don't know >> anything. >> I think that
029has more to do with a schoolboard member. >> It does, but >> you're not granting that access. >> One second. >> I believe we have something that we could tack on to. Let me just look at the district director of board operations. Go down to the end and there's one called professionalism. So for 8.2 that could be considered covering it, but we could also add to it including trying to figure out how you word that's there confidentiality of sensitive information and materials. I'm going to go through each of these and make that change just so that Right. Any other last one? All right. I made that for all three. Are there any other? Can we accept those without objection? All right, that's approved. Any other changes? All right. Can I have a motion to send
030these all on collectively to the full board? >> I so move. >> Is there a second? Mr. McDaniel. All those in favor? That is unanimous for board members present. All right. Wonderful. So, to recap, we've uh we are suggesting a new timeline to the board. We are suggesting a new uh process and format for the evaluations to the board and we are suggesting uh job description aligned evaluation uh forms for the board. Um so those have all been moved on. Let's go ahead and back to board docs. SOP and we're going to be relying a good chunk on Janet here. That's okay. >> I'm not sure how close we will be to uh wanting to move them all along, but we will see. One one moment. All right. So, so that people are aware of
031uh what we're talking about here, the clerk's team, and you can correct me if I misstate anything, Janet. the clerk's team is working on all of these SOPs and there were specific ones that they thought the admin committee should weigh in on before uh they're finalized. So uh and these are generally speaking uh things that relate to uh like money and and board member specifics. Let's go ahead and look at the back to school night funds SOP first. And so these SOPs are essentially like the policies that govern the schoolboard office. My only question about this one is that there has been some discussion about whether or not it would make sense for us to not solely allow those those funds to be utilized at the beginning of the year as we have we have
032uncovered some fees that are being charged the schoolboard office um more consistently now. And so utilizing it for community use and things like that, it might make more sense whether or not just to make this more general throughout the year um related to funds that are utilized rather than having them just be tied to back to school funds. >> So I think the way that we can tackle this Janice is we don't have the word docs is kind of like governance would talk about like the desired changes and then bring them back to the next meeting. We'll try scheduling an earlier meeting. Finalize them all maybe in. >> Okay. I'll look for a date in April. >> Okay. >> So, we'll talk about these things. >> Are we tied to Wednesday or is a different
033day of the week possible? >> What I mean more for this purpose is like as we talk about it, we'll suggest things that should be updated in advance. >> Uh so, so that Okay. >> So, M Mr. Chairman, I could we separate the evaluations from this in terms of sending it to a >> Yeah, that is that stuff's already on its way. >> Okay. Okay. All right. Because I need to have that finalized so that I >> Agreed. No, that's on its way. >> It failed to my staff. >> No, no, no. And then the other aspect is on all of these I would like to make sure that we have a last updated date. I'm not suggesting that it echoes exactly what's done with our um policies or regulations or anything like that, but
034I would at least have like to have at the end of each one when the last time it's been updated just so that we understand. >> That's wonderful. Um I'd be fine with uh none of this back to school stuff is in the governance manual, right? >> No. >> Yeah. It's just the practice, right? And so this is solidifying the in practice. I would be perfectly comfortable changing the title of this. Uh what was the language you used? Calling it something else. >> We haven't decided as a board what we're going to call. >> Well, we're not deciding here either. >> No, I agree. Um and so I don't think I have a recommendation for a specific. It would basically be school board member funds like or school board off, you know, I'm trying to
035figure out district like each individual schoolboard member. um yearly funds is how we could say it just to have it be very general. But the idea here is that rather than have it tied to a very specific activity at the beginning of the year, it would be allowed to be utilized. >> What about annual engagement funds? >> That's perfect. And then so it would be changed from back to school night throughout to annual engagement activities >> or even or even you know schoolboard member support funds. It could be supporting >> well this is where so my mind was going towards there are a number of things that we have budgeted from lobbying well not lobbying it's advocacy uh to um professional development and and this is separate from that. So if depends on how general
036you want to go, right? Like >> so let me let me give you a very petty example. >> Yeah. >> Petty example. You meet with group of community members. Uh you want to be able to provide even bottles of water. We don't have a fund for that. We do not. >> I think that would fit under engagement. The thing I >> Yeah. I would hate to think of it. I I have trouble thinking of what board members might do to use the funds in a weird way, >> but where there's a will, right? Um >> I mean, would be will be we'll all be accountable for >> funds. Yeah. Well, for example, so like the water thing makes perfect sense to me. If I'm having an event and I want to have water and cookies
037there or what have you, that would come out of that fund right there. If I'm having an event and I wanted to have a flyer that could be handed out, that would come out of that fund right there. So like I'm thinking of like what is a broad category that sounds more specific than just calling it a fund. >> So So that is why I said you know board member support fund. So board member would be will be all four years. >> What about board member activities? annual >> I I was thinking annual community engagement activity fund because the idea here is that it's very specific to engagement with the community. It's not necessarily I I want to be very careful that it doesn't sound like it's you things that we can utilize for ourselves.
038That's not the point here. The point is is it's to facilitate our our engagement with the community. It's if we need translation services, this is the fund it would come out of. It's right now we haven't we don't have anything identified within the schoolboard office that would allow for individual members to do those things. Um and as long as we stay within the amount that we decide on as a board I think that it works it works but it would be targeted towards external engagement. You know, since Madame Sh just me mentioned a a translation services, as I was thinking about some of these, uh, I felt very baffled about the fact that we as an elected group of members have all these obstacles for us to be able to perform our our jobs as
039you know as elected officials who make who will make ultimate decisions. on allocation of something >> bigger than I barriers. What I'm what I'm what I'm saying is what I'm saying is the fact that we have to discuss in length about setting aside thousand dollars for certain things and we have to pay for use of our own school facilities >> and and and and all that and and also we have to pay for translation services >> but the superintendent's office does as well. that every office does. The difficulty, right, is that we only get so many dollars as a >> what do they call it? >> And these are fee based. >> This is called a well this is a a program budget. We have a program budget for the school board in the same
040way that every element of the division has one. And so we have some flexibility, but if we don't count the pennies, like them not charging us for something doesn't mean it's not coming from somewhere, >> right? Um, so for the purposes of this, I don't disagree that we get we should have a conversation about these other things, but you know, I'm inclined that the public wouldn't know what the school board's actually spending money on if we didn't track it from the schoolboard office side. Um, and if we track it from the schoolboard office side, it only makes sense that it would come from our budget. Um, so generally speaking, are we in support of aligning this particular SOP to annual as opposed to being finite at the beginning of the year and calling it something
041along the lines of an annual community engagement activities fund? or would it be a board member's annual community engagement activities fund so that it doesn't imply that it's just there are a number of places in this SOP that we'd have to strip out the language about back to school night and the timing of these things and when things have to be spent by. But all the other stuff about how to get reimbursed and whatnot makes sense. >> Yeah. And I apologize, it was after we determined that we had excess area, we had excess funding um that schoolboard members didn't use at the beginning of the year that we had room that we could utilize them for things where we had people that wanted to run activity or you know, community events that we wanted to
042make sure. But yeah, I did talk to the superintendent about whether or not these are the same types of things that that she's utilizing um >> along along the same line in the past in the past even for A professional development funding that each both members gets a lotment for that excess fund or unspent professional development funding could have been accessed was accessed by some other board members who might need additional amount besides the allotment. They were like, uh, you know, I am $200 short to attend this and you're not using $2,000 or able to use that fund in the past. That flexibility used to be practiced. >> I would love us to get back to the point where we are um understanding that we're a team working together. I I think that that's a
043lovely thing. Um, unfortunately, every time we've talked about this up to this point, we haven't had that type of agreement. So, I'm very eager to get us back to the point where we acknowledge the fact that some of us are doing things that others aren't. Um, and I mean, one thing that I think is possible here is that if we start getting closer to a fund that you can utilize how you how you deem fit, as long as you are meeting the requirements of having professional development every year and you're having, you know, that you can use the funds that you have allocated for your office for these things. And if you want to hold more community events and you aren't going to as many conferences, then you have the flexibility to be able to
044use that funding how you want. Before we dive down this rabbit hole, this is not the focus of this SOP. I don't believe it's the focus of the other SOPs that we have in front of us. That doesn't mean it's not a topic worth discussing. I think we have a a budget conversation with the clerk in June or April, I don't remember. Um, in which case we can talk about that there. We did previously adjust the PD hadn't been adjusted in like more than a decade. um despite the costs of the conferences and transportation going up. Anyways, um are we good with those requested changes to further discuss at the next meeting? >> I am fine. >> Any objections? All right. We can revisit the tape if the tape like somebody's videotaping this. We can
045revisit the recording if we need to for for more notes. All right. Let's look at closed meeting attendance including committee meetings. Janet, you want to talk to us about this one? >> Um, this one actually came out of uh Kyle's request. So, glad you're here today, sir. Um, this happened to be a a question about who is allowed to attend closed meetings, including committee meetings, and who is not um and if there was any sort of guidelines to it. And so we wrote this in thinking to keep it more like audit committee um and just um in general that you know permission is given and uh NDAs are signed if they're committee members um and just making sure that the attendance is known in advance um so that there's no question about whether or not
046that person um was able to come to the meeting and that everyone agreed that it was a good idea for them to come since we do talk about some kind of um dial pit topics enclosed. >> I thank you for raising this. I forgotten this was a suggestion. So where this originated um was actually out of CPDC. So when I took over CPDC um I discovered going back through meeting minutes that community members from FPAC had attended closed sessions of CPDC um for various reasons. So the question then became if that what the practice was if they had to sign NDAs similar to what audit committee has to sign to be able to participate in that. So glad to see um you know some consistency around that. The only question I had um was whether
047or not in the last section under guidelines uh board members may also ask fellow board members to leave the room and recuse themselves if it's determined that a board member has a conflict of interest. I if from my general understanding that is not >> legal >> a function that the board can actually ask someone to do. So I am concerned I don't think it's in line with the overall board policy. So, I'm concerned about including it here. >> Just to clarify, the board can't compel somebody out and it really is a judgment call of the individual and they would be informed in the moment whether their presence because of a conflict poses a uh legal or financial risk to the school division. And then it would be up to them to make that decision because
048there's nobody that can enforce it. We just need to update that accordingly. >> Just quickly, I believe there's a policy regarding this that we had to use what 1420. That a policy or regulation? >> That's a policy. public funds and property. >> 1420. >> Um I think maybe that's not the one, but there is there is one that we had to use. Um >> let's double check and if it is part of our policies and let's make sure that we quote or we >> have it cleared by legal. will not only have it cleared by legal but also give it one of the main questions that I had with this is how many of these things need to be codified in the governance manual before we can put it in an SOP. The so the
049SOPs are just a way we're going to be doing things. It's not necessarily a place to set our guidelines fully. And so if there are things that we need to have in the governance manual that are part of this then I think that we need to make sure that we do that. That's a raises an interesting question because what is the role of the schoolboard office in this suggested SOP? I feel like this would be a governance manual thing. this whole yeah this whole SOP I agree because this is not this is directing board member activities not inner office operations >> except for the fact of the portion where it talks about the timeline required for community members to be included in an outside meet you know in a closed meeting like there are some
050schoolboard office aspects of this and so what I would like to see >> but that's like a meeting prep thing >> it is and so I would I would like to see us because then we can point to to it as the guideline. But again, I'm still wondering if that's port a portion of that is what needs to be in the governance manual, particularly related to standing committees because they're only >> any standing committee can can have a closed meeting for some reason. >> They can, but it it's Yes, I gotcha. Okay. >> But in theory, if this was part of the governance manual minus what the staff does to effectuate it, staff would be thinking, well, how are we going to effectuate that? But we better have an SOP for how we actually execute
051on the governance manuals rules that the board has set for its committee just like they do I know that there's an SOP that you all created for how do we run a meeting a regular meeting right all the different things that have to happen to make that successful including bringing people in for virtual and not or whatever. So in my head for this one we should divorce those two things. Maybe send part of this for uh governance manual edition and then once that's done they can create an SOP for it. >> Yeah. What I would say is that we absolutely can update I mean PE updated the governance manual for the portions that were appropriate related to the community advisory um group. So, I think that that would be perfectly in line for something for
052us to take on to do rather than having it I didn't know if you were recommending having it sent to governance. >> Uh, no. I got plenty to do. Any other thoughts on that one before we are we all agreed to do that? Okay. No objection. Up next, I went to the back. I hate board docs. >> Leave. This one is straight from uh Atlas and kind of what we do in practice and then um what was in Atlas uh under the all the HR requirements for leave. >> Just a moment. I'm pulling it up. >> Leave Anderson. >> The only question I have a couple questions. First, um I do not believe the school board student representative is authorized leave. So I think that that whole sentence at the last portion of that on
053the back side on the second page can be removed because it's not it's not necessary because they're not approved to have leave. Um and then the second one is actually something that we're going to be talking about as a board. um under the guidelines, we can't use a hyperlink with here. It needs to be that the docu that's the new ADA compliance issue. So, we need to make sure that we're outlining what what it is that we're linking and then link that thing. So, that's just an update that I noticed that in a couple of different spots. So, we're just going we just need to make sure if it was use, you know, guidelines and useful tips for using my time, we just hyperlink that portion of it and take the out because that's an
054update coming quickly. >> Yeah, all of these were done in November, so before the ADA stuff came out. >> These are they're just minor corrections. >> Anybody else? >> All right, why don't we move it along as adjusted for the next meeting? non-exempt employee overtime. This one came out of the consensus in the 517 retreat regarding uh not using overtime as much, but this is if you were to have overtime, this is the process. Go ahead. >> Um, in the guidelines section, do we need to define because we don't we very much don't want to make this or give the impression that this usurps what the HR guidelines are for sure. Um, so I don't think we need the first paragraph in there because we don't define what the overtime rate would be. So we
055don't need to define what the standard rate would be. So I just don't think that we need the first paragraph under guidelines because Yeah, because if they're eligible for up to 40 hours, then I figured I just Yeah. So I don't think we I very much don't want us to replicate HR. And that's one of the things that I was going to mention with all of the SOPs. If we are pulling information from another, and we've done this in a couple of spots, but if we're pulling this information from a reference document, I think it's really important for us to link to where people can find the reference document. Not necessarily because I expect all links to stay perfect, but even if it's what to search for on the FCPS website, I think it would
056be helpful to get people in the right spot. Anything else? All right. Governance committee. I um I just wanted to speak up about the fact that the governance committee is working on creating a style guide um related and once we update that policy then the board will be able to authorize that. Um if that's true then we probably need to reference the style guide in this document as well. So that way um on some of the other things and the other aspect that I wanted to put or mention under timeline is that I would like us to make sure that we are generic in the references to the outside organizations that we're affiliated with um just to make sure that we don't have any affiliations that may change over time. So right now we reference
057um that in May that we are looking at the VSBA information. And so I just think it's important for us um to keep that more generic depending on whether or not our source documents may change. >> Wondering if this should be I think this is good because it's tailored to what the SBO is responsible for. And if that's the case, do you think that it's um policy process for the schoolboard office support of the governance committee? Like changing the title of it would would indicate >> could be, but it's not necessarily This is why it's tricky, right? What if it's a policy that's being tackled? That rarely happens. >> Well, then it wouldn't be governance committee. >> Yeah. No, never mind. But the other thing we could say, well, really the whole timeline is based
058on what the governance committee is doing. So I'm okay in this case um with allowing it to be because it's really talking about what what we should be doing to work on something ahead of time so that the governance committee is set up for success in the future year. Mhm. >> Yeah, this has been the superintendent seen it and has been talked through with the governance committee chair as well. So, some of the suggestions in here do align with what is in the style guide and the eventual edits for the directives, >> right? We just want to make sure that we reference that style guide as the because if something changes the style guide is where they should be going. Um and then the other aspect of it is is that um the only concern
059I have is this is very much about the current governance chair setting the work up for the next governance chair. And if if someone I mean oftentimes we're responsive to things that are occurring within the division and also it doesn't leave it doesn't provide leave for the govern the current governance chair to set their own agenda. So I I'm a little bit worried that it's going to be a lot of work for the outgoing governance chair to set up and have it be that the incoming governance chair decides not to take on those items. So just to keep in mind >> theory if the governance manual says we have to have something done on a certain cycle we need a process for that right one would hope that we pick governance chairs who won't make
060that happen right as much as their committee will let them. All right, professional development. This one's good. So, right now the legislature defines professional development as things that professionally develop. So we have a ton of latitude and since we've not officially defined board what we interpret that to mean could literally be anything. So when we provide funding by board member, I don't think this even curtails or strictly interprets what professional development is. So lets board members make the ultimate determination along certain guidelines. Um but you know for people watching at home, the state requires board members to participate in professional development. Doesn't say how much. doesn't say anything other than that it has to be done annually and it doesn't define what it is. So we typically use VSBA events or other conferences. Um some
061board members have gone to legal things. Some have gone to um specific education conferences to try and use that as their professional development and with no guidance officially from the board or from the clerk's office other than really helping to facilitate us getting that development. So that's what this is designed to do is put a little bit more meat on the bones >> because we have some things in here that are also including in compliance training. I would just want to make sure that we put that in the title as well. Um, and then the other I had a few questions. Are did we create a professional development compliance report form? Because I've never seen that. So, >> no, it's just the on standard five, which is about it. It just says has to res
062the clerk has to say you're in compliance. So, we don't have anything about it. I think it's a work in progress. Um because each year she just kind of signs off on Yeah, you're in compliance. >> It's kind of like the um hard to do. >> So this but this is Oh, so this would just be a compliance form that we would say yes, we have been professionally developed this year >> if you want to have it say that. Yes. >> Okay. >> No, I think that that makes sense. Um and it serves in line. So it's all about us tracking our compliance for different requirement estate requirements, >> not forcing them to >> 100%. I would want to have it be more in line with what the actual language in the standard is. >>
063That's fine. >> So that way, you know, did you do this? Yes, we did this. >> I just don't I always look at the titles as important because if somebody's searching for something, that's the way they're going to find it again. And so I just want to make sure that annual requirements for training or professional development are included in the in the title because we do talk about FOYA and the other one conflict of interest. Anybody else have feedback? All right. School anniversary proclamation recognition. So, we just did this one. Um, this was built to kind of give some guidelines for how the day would go. Um, I definitely would go back and uh readjust some of the guidelines and timelines on this Anybody else comments? Right. student discipline appeals. >> This one and the
064next one come directly from what we do and from policy 2611. So they're kind of tied to that policy um for timelines and things like that. This is just a little bit more um what our offices do in coordination with other offices in the division um to make sure that we all are in agreeance on when things should be delivered and things like that and how. But with you know there may be some changes to this with changes to the policy anyone right discipline expulsion same And again, we'll pick these all up for moving on to the full board at the next meeting. And then student leadership development program. This helps put some meat on the bones around the work that Kevin and the clerks do to facilitate the program. I think what was important
065in this one was tightening up the timeline because I think there's been some confusion about that in particular. Um, and so that's kind of what our goal was for that. >> Right. So holistically, what I will do uh after we collect the feedback for this conversation that we've just had is we'll share these out again to committee members uh in the scheduling of the meeting in April, letting them know that we'll be having that discussion and hoping to send these on to the full board um at that meeting. Um, and if people have further edits they'd like to discuss, they should best practice do what we did previously and submit those to to me and to the clerk team so that we can have those ready for the board's discussion. Um, obviously we'll discuss anything
066that people want to, but it'll make it easier for all of us if we have it in advance. So, we'll work on getting um Word or Google Doc versions of things so that people can play with language and such. So, Mr. Chairman, I remember hearing about uh from next year which board member picking two. >> I I'd heard similar ideas being thrown around. >> Is that is that is that is that part of this or they part of this or >> this is how the office functions not how the board members do. >> Okay. So, uh that's going to be a discussion coming from where >> I don't know that anybody's initiated it. I think what happened was we had our our big kickoff and people commented it'd be great if we had two people
067because so many people applied. I don't think anything's >> so that is not currently being discussed by any committee or committees or >> No, I think that if I had to guess the the student leadership program, it could probably handle or be be utilized in a larger handbook as to how we do those who do utilize that with a little bit more information to codify what we've been doing up to this point. I think this is a great general framework. Um, and I'm also wondering whether or not again we're in the same position where this is actually something that needs to be put in the governance manual and whatever handbook we create as to how to run that program is actually what lives in the clerk's office. And so it's just something to keep in
068mind that it may be that the goal of the, you know, explaining the goal of the leadership program and that it is something that the board does. I think it may be a little bit easier to deal with that way. um rather than have it just be because it's not as much. Um I do like the fact that the general timeline is in here. I just wonder if some of this information needs to actually be put in the governance manual. We'll share out editable versions and a meeting will likely be a partial closed meeting uh to discuss griev grievous process. I'm gonna final comment from me is you know going back to the a number of students who can participate through this leadership program this this year for this particular year a number of applications
069>> 400 people >> 400 400 it just shows that tremendous interest on the part of students wanting to participate in the program and they're looking at you know a applications. A lot of highly qualified deserting students that whether uh whether there is a good reason for a limit to a one purpose member when students are wanting to do participate in this. So uh if uh you know chairman madame chair doesn't know at this point in time whether any committee is discussing this then I would like to have an opportunity to have that discussed and make a decision. So >> I I agree and I think that the best place would probably be Pek to start. Um, also because they're already doing work to determine whether or not I I would say the same entrance interest
070lives to be a school board representative. And so I would I think it's in there. The two are in line with each other. And I would be very interested in in encouraging our partners on PEC to go ahead and continue to look at that in relation and it kind of works with the public engagement portion of what they're >> Okay. Madame Ch. So uh uh would you be communicating with the pack to see whether they are going to be or >> if I'm directed by this committee to do so? >> I I would love to make suggestion. I'm not going to direct you but >> this committee deals with staff. >> It does. >> Hang on. Hang on. This committee deals with staff and things of that nature. This committee is not going to direct
071any action of the board because >> of course not >> or or the or the chair or or the vice chair. >> But I guess what I'm asking for is consensus for its interest to have >> consensus from onethird of the board from 25% of the board. >> The governance manual lists a variety of ways that board members can have something happen. >> Somebody wants to bring a forum topic. I think it would be expeditiously sent over to PEC immediately. Um I am very open to the idea of having two or three people added >> but I do have I will I will I will contact PEC chair to see whether they have any intention of discussing it and and putting a recommendations to board and if not if not I would encourage both pet
072chair to consider that if not uh then I can bring a forum topic. I would also like to make sure that we're talking to the clerk team to to see whether or not we can >> what the bandwidth is >> the bandwidth is >> so that will be the part of the discussion right if if if a scrub of the office needs additional support to be able to carry that out versus school yeah school office in a sense >> whether the school should be respon I mean we have an entire leadership academy at Lewis I wonder what function they might play in in facilitating a leadership program >> many of also has two staff members now. So, it could be that we our own staff can help support this in a little bit better way
073than we have. >> So, there's a lot of different things, but I just want to make sure that we're staying focused on the staffing aspect of the program as opposed to the function. >> Again, I'm going to give a full credit to my school assistant right here to take copious notes and make a request to a pet chair. >> Also, we are now recording these meetings and streaming them on the internet so that people can take notes at their own leisure. You could watch this in double speed. don't have to sit through the whole thing we just sat through. You could watch it in triple speed if you wanted to. We sound like the chipmunks. Um, all right. Uh, I said what we're doing next time in the time after. Anything else? >> Quickly, I
074do have other SOPs that I was writing for the medium list which were coming after we looked at the high priority. So, I don't know how many you want for me to have ready of those for the following meeting. If >> you have things ready, just give them all to us. >> Okay. >> I will work on it. Cool. All right. Uh I will give 45 minutes back.