1/6/2026 - FCPS School Board Governance Committee Meeting

001[music] We'll just be a few more minutes. Thank you. Actually, we could go ahead and get started. We'll take care of some admin things. Thank you. Are people walking around now? Are we going to get Can we go ahead and get started, folks? >> Okay, we're going to go ahead and convene the governance committee meeting on January 6th at 5:37. Thanks for your patience and starting the uh we are all here. Happy New Year everyone. The first order of business is to approve the minutes. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes? Agenda item 1.02. Mr. FR is a moved. Uh Dr. Anderson seconds. All in favor? That is unanimous for the motion. Minutes. Motion of the minutes. Okay. All right. Today we are going to get through uh three buckets of work. One

002is uh to work on capital improvement program or facilities related policies that have little or no change. then we'll move on to ones that might require a bit more discussion and have change and then we're going to look at some human resources related policies. Um so let's dive in. We're in agenda item 1.03. The first policy is policy 1460, religion, and we do have on our board docs the redlinined version. Um Dr. Anderson, I see you want to be recognized. Go ahead. >> Yes, thank you. um what I would like to recommend and this is not an edit that is substantial to the content but rather to um the grammar. Um, I think the philosophy is a little bit laden and I'd like to propose omitting the first part of the philosophy that says the

003school board affirms their position that I'd like to begin that section with the Fairfax County School Board shall be neutral in respect to religious beliefs and shall not engage in any activity that disparages or advocates religion. Mr. Fr. >> Thanks. I think this raises a question of I'm not sure why we have the philosophy section of our policies generally speaking. Um they should speak the policies themselves should speak for themselves. As I've been crafting some of these I'm like why am I writing this? Um and so um I would also say that the suggested change would be stepping away from the format of all of the other philosophies that have been included. So, I'm not opposed to it necessarily, but if we're looking for uniformity, that would be not uniform. >> And that's May I

004I also think that as I'm reading these, just kind of refreshing my memory, they're all kind of inconsistent. So, not all of them start with affirming. And I I don't necessarily get that they all need to start with affirming. I think we need to have a philosophy that speaks to the values, but some of them are a little bit wonkier than others. And I don't think we lose anything by removing that first component. So I and thank you Mr. FR for your work on these philosophies. Just a reminder, you know, we have talked about philosophy, purpose, vision. The goal here is to at least this is a better step forward. We're getting the purpose of the board's, you know, values down. So I would say without objection, uh striking the school board affirms their position

005that and just begin the philosophy with the Fairfax County School Board shall be neutral, etc. So starting leaving with the the please leave the the there. So and then if that needs to be adjusted in other policies just like we did previously we can go ahead and do that by agreement. So So is anyone ready to make a Dr. Anderson has a motion to move this to Wait, hold on. Let's >> I will make a mot a motion. Yes. >> Yes. I will make a motion to move policy 1460.3 to the full board. Oh, okay. The governance committee will send policy 1460. Religion. That's what it's called. Okay. Religion literally as revised to the full board for adoption. >> A second. Mr. Fishville. Second. Any further comment, Dr. Ederson? >> Oh, whoa. >> There it

006is. >> Uh oh. There's no way to get that. It's like [laughter] >> pass me yours. >> Well, I'll just have to do this. >> I'll just have to do this. >> Meeting just got real short. >> Okay. Uh Dr. >> Dr. Anderson. >> Oh, thank you. >> Oh, what? What just happened? >> I wasn't sure if there was a floor in there. >> Thank you. [laughter] >> Thank you, Deputy Clerk. Brown. >> So excited that I >> Dr. Dr. Anderson, do you have anything more you'd like to share? No, that's it. Okay, Dr. Mr. Fresh. Okay, all those in favor of the motion, that is unanimous. Way to go. That was about five minutes. Okay. Next, we have uh policy 2201, compulsory attendance requirements. Dr. Anderson. Um, I'd like to make a motion to

007move this forward if we're able to omit the first part and start this with the Fairfax County School Board shall adhere to following the Virginia code requirements regarding compulsory school attendance. And then I do have a question. So, I'm just going to wait for the clerk to capture that in notes while right to Oh, go ahead. >> Sure. Um, the Fairfax County School Board, again trying to be consistent with what was in the previous one, shall adhere to following the Virginia code requirements dot dot dot. Anyone else for some comments? I do want to say that although we just approved that religion policy, the religion policy under its section, well, it's misnumbered. Yikes. So, in the religion policy, the summary does not state that the philosophy was included, whereas in this one, it does state

008that the summary is included. So, that is something one of those administrative things that I think we I will ask if we can give um access, you know, flexibility to the clerk. we have that language that we can vote on at the end to make those similarities. Right. So, we want to be sure that summaries of changes since the last publication. We could just say without objection and just add it. >> Sure. I I think and I'm trying to write down the stock language here. So, like that one was the school board um [sighs] affirms anyway. Okay. Anything else about this one? >> Yeah. I I had a question on 2201 regarding parents or guardians whose child will not have reached his or her sixth birthday. Um is this just speaking to Dr. E that

009they can hold their children outside? They can hold their children home. >> Okay. Um, right. And I guess the question that raised for me is, and I don't know whether this is the right place to do that, and it may not, and please confirm that with me, we have a policy that you have to be five by September 30th to enter kindergarten, but there's no policy, well, there's no code, there's no Virginia code that says you have to be six in order to attend first grade. Should that be in here? Where does that live? I'm guessing it might not live. I don't know if that was my best first statement. >> Sounds wonderful. You should record a song. >> Yes, I probably should. Um, in part because children might transfer in who've been in kindergarten

010in a state that may have allowed an exception. So if they're five and seven8s, we wouldn't hold them out of first grade if they've already completed kindergarten satisfactorily, right? And I guess I'm asking where does that live? Like could that live here? >> Like we would add something about first grade here. >> That's what I'm asking. Like for kids who are and you know I have the example in my house. My daughter was at a private kindergarten and then well private day school preschool they decided to move her to kindergarten and my thought is well when you go to public school we'll just push you back which we never did do because she's tall and etc etc. But when she started first grade, she was five and she wasn't going to be six for many,

011many, many more months, >> which I think we're fine with if she's done kindergarten, >> right? But do we need I guess the question is, do we need to say that's somewhere? And if it's not here, does that live someplace else? That is a question that I've been [clears throat] asked before. >> I don't think we need to because it reduces our flexibility. I think saying that you have to be five to do kindergarten is reasonable. And then but we do have children that transfer in. >> No. Very good. Thank you. [snorts] >> Uh one other thing I will add is I think it would be more accurate regarding the summary of changes since last publication to say since last review because that's actually the title of the date below and publication just seems kind

012of random because we're not publishers. [laughter] So I would just ask um for agreement [clears throat] in that without objection. I think there's no objection. Okay. Is there any uh action to uh move this policy 2201 forward? Anyone want to make a motion? >> Oh, you made it. >> Oh, that was your first comment, right? Did you Well, I'm sorry. Did you want to make a second comment? No. Okay. >> The second >> Oh, got it. Okay. So, Dr. Anderson had moved and spoken to it and Dr. Fr Mr. Fr was uh seconding. Any other comments? Nope. All right. All in favor of sending that the governance committee send policy 2201 compulsory attendance requirements as revised to the full board for adoption and that is unanimous for everyone. Thank you. Okay. Next policy 4425 lactation

013support programming. Dr. Anderson. >> Um I'm going to start with my question. Um the language in blue says that we shall provide um accommodations until the child is one. Why so specific? Is it is this a legal requirement that only until the child is one? And who's checking that birth date? Shouldn't it be as a parent is requiring it that we provide it? Seems to be kind of judgy. >> [laughter] >> I agree with the latter statement. Um I just wonder if that's within the statute, but I'll ask John to look that up. Um so while he looks that up, I have another thought in terms of the beginning of this philosophy. The Fairfax County School Board recognizes that's where I would start and then take out everything else. Recognizes the wellocumented health advantages. So

014that's how I'd like it to be worded, but I'm also questioning that recognition. This is and I know this is our values and this is our beliefs, but is this the territory we really want to be weighing in? I I I just some people think, you know, breastfeeding is best. Some people do not think that. I I I don't want as a board member to do anything besides what is required by the law. And I I don't want to get into that space where we're saying this is well documented and it is good. What if I'm a staff member reading this and I choose to not breastfeed? Oh, but the jud the board is judging me because it's well documented as per their words. I just wonder if we could take a more neutral stance

015on the introduction. >> Okay. Yes, ma'am. Did Did we write that? >> Well, we also philosophy >> before you decide to do that, others might want to comment on Dr. Reed's I mean Dr. Anderson's statement. So, >> yes, ma'am. >> Yeah. U Miss Lady. Well, I mean, you know, I don't know that we need a philosophy for all of these, but we were trying to create consistency, and this is the direction that it seemed like the momentum was was was taking us. Um, I do think it's a section we spent a lot of time word smithing. Uh, I'm fine to have one. Um, and I I I think I agree. Anything in there that could be misinterpreted as leaning towards a belief in something versus people who may not believe in it, we can make

016it more benign. So, I'd be comfortable with editing it. >> Thank you, Mr. Fresh. >> So, I'm okay with the first part that speaks to the science behind the belief. Uh, I agree on the arbitrary age usage being struck. um and would support um well I mean here's the question right because this is not just a philosophy right this is laying out that um there will be reasonable breaks for staff I presume this could apply to students as well >> yeah Yes, in fact we did confirm that it's >> up to the age of one. And so there may be a reason >> that there's an age limit on when they want to allow children to be brought to school, right? And so maybe there's a better way of articulating that. And it seems that

017like the reason they may have put the age limit on there is because um the child might be least disruptive if the child was older. I'm not sure. >> But the child is not present if you breast if you're pumping. >> Well, let's before we debate it, let's uh Mr. Fris, did you have more to add? >> No, it does seem more prescriptive than the other philosophies. >> Um, >> it is in the code of Virginia until [clears throat] the age of one. >> And I I will add we could become more liberal than that, but that is the code of Virginia. Well, and just um as a facilitator, I just want to mention before I uh call on our next member, I just sent around the memo that was given to us previously and

018so it does reference the state code. It doesn't say that that's what the state code says, but um that might be helpful for you all to take a look at again. Um I know I just did uh Miss uh St. John Cutting. >> Um so I I agree with Well, I know we're going to the code. Doesn't mean we have to stick to the code. We could expand it if we wanted to, but I do think that this justification that we're putting here is because we recognize that this is important. That's why we're allowing it to happen. Because what ends up happening sometimes and there will be resentment. Why does she get a break and I don't? Well, because if we didn't think that this was valuable based on science, then why are we affording

019a break for people to take time off and go take a break? Um, and that that's just the one of the things that I want to say that this affirms the fact that we are making this decision based on scientific evidence. It and it doesn't judge whether you decide not to. I mean, some people can breastfeed, some people can't. Some people choose to, some people choose not to. I don't think the judgment is there. I think the judgment goes more to workplace and why we're allowing this to happen within the workplace, if that if that makes sense. So, I think that that's why I would want that to still be there. Um, and then if we want to change the date the the age again that's going to go back to like do are some

020people going to feel that it's that there are some individuals that are being abusive of that those breaks versus not um like if I mean like I would have breastfed my kids till five if they would have I mean I love breastfeeding so but some people would not not That's a lot of it for me. [laughter] >> I'm sorry. I'm No, I'm just saying that there are some people that will breastfeed their children for a long time. >> Yeah. Yeah. Which is why I thought >> Do you know what I'm saying? And there's some people six months I'm done, you know? >> So, so I I'm trying to be sensitive to the person that is using the service and also the staff members that are watching the person use the service, if that makes sense.

021So in the interest of time, I want to just point out a few things. One of them is that this concept of acknowledging something because it's something that some my people might need. It makes me think of our policy around uh rooms for prayer and meditation. I would like to look at that and see what do we what's the commonality, right? Like we can compare. The other thing though, unfortunately, as I'm looking at the format of these things, I first want to say we've come a long way. We've done a lot of work with these policies, but not a single one of these three is formatted the same. This one says purpose, then it says number two, summary of changes, then it says philosophy. The other versions have philosophy section. This one has a goals

022section. The previous one had requirements. The previous one had a policy statement. We're going to need the superintendent and the clerk's help to point these things out and help us rectify. Now, I do have a suggested format. I'd have to pull it back up. I thought we discussed this at the end of the previous year, Miss Lady. I don't recall, but either I get that we don't want to adopt something outright and have to change everything, but at least as we review things, we've got to be looking at the formats because it's it's it's a problem. And this one, I mean, doesn't even make sense. It's 1 2 3. I mean, we need to be presented with right things. So, what I'd like to do is um set this one aside because I don't want

023us to get hung up on this. We have other things that we have put off. So, I'd like to put this aside and we could determine what to do with it at the end of the meeting if that is amendable to everyone. Is that okay without objection? Okay. Thank you everyone. >> Miss Mayor, I do want to note that my office is working with the superintendent's office on coming up with uh formatting suggestions. So that is working on a template that can be used moving forward as we start making changes to policies. >> That that's not new news. We've discussed that last year and I have an example. But at the very least, if we don't have it adopted, please don't give the board three documents with three different formats. Make your best recommendation to

024us. Okay. Okay. The next one, facilities. um uh 1.04. Let's pull this up here. Okay. All right. So, we're going to start with child care services. >> Would you like to speak, Dr. Anderson? >> I'd like to move it forward to the school board for consideration. I know you have language, but >> is there a second to that? Mr. Fresh, Dr. Anderson would like to speak. >> Mr. Fresh. >> Yeah. Without objection. >> I think we should. >> Yeah. And we'll try to write it as we go. >> Sure. Let me make a note of that as well. Okay. Let me So we're going to be um uniform in how we capture the summary of changes. Okay. >> Yes. Uh any other comment on this one? >> Yeah. Oh, sorry, Miss Lady. Thank you. Sorry,

025I I'm trying to find it in my binder, but um I just I I I have a question about when a school is over capacity and we have an an ongoing lease with a childcare center who's in a school like that and where trailers have been put on the property and I've had in one of my particular schools constituents upset that their kids are moved to a trailer. Um, having said that, I ran on advocacy for preschool for all. [laughter] So, I don't I don't want to give up space. I'm just asking the question. I don't know if that that's not in the policy anywhere. >> Yes. Thank you. Uh, Dr. Anderson, it says classroom space as is available. So, I guess I just need to follow up on the accuracy of and the fidelity

026with which that's being done. Okay. Thank you. Um, are there other comments on this? We have a motion to move it forward. So, it looks like we can Oh. [clears throat] Okay. So, um it sounds like we have another question. Dr. Anderson, >> no, I was just hoping to hear what Dr. Reed's response was to Miss Lady's question because we have similar things where trailers are being added in order to do this accommodation. Like, how are we working around being um adhering to this f to this policy when we are putting in preschool programming? because otherwise if we're not doing that, why bother have it? >> I guess I'll [clears throat] have to go back and check whether it's a preschool of ours or a sack class or I'm not sure what we're talking about.

027[clears throat] >> Okay. It says county preschool. So, we're seeing that as different from our >> Well, that's Well, Mr. Fresh, did you want to add if that's okay, Dr.? >> Yeah. Um, I think sometimes like specificity matters, right? So like trailers are classrooms. We may not think that they are as good a classroom as a classroom in a in a physical school building, but we use them as classrooms. And so I take the point and have students in the school that Miss Lady is thinking about. Um and it's an issue that should be addressed. Um but if there are trailers at a school or modulars at a school and they're being used for for uh daycare, preschool, etc., It's because we have the classroom space for it. However, we define classrooms. Modulars are classrooms.

028Trailers are classrooms. School buildings have classrooms. So, um I would not want to tie the hands uh of staff on whether those services can be offered outright uh in the entire county if there are not uh available classrooms in uh the school building because you can think about margins, right? Like what what is that to say? Like um if the student population already pushes the capacity into trailers or modulars, but they could do they could have space for prek and and daycare in it in the extra space that's not being used, but they're still going to be in there in those uh fac in those trailers or or modulars regardless of whether there's daycare or preschool. then it just gets really hard to um put down rules that can apply neatly to everything. Um I

029think if the board wanted to have something along the lines of um what the priorities are like is there a prioritization of the use space? Um I think that's probably something that would be would merit further discussion. That's it. >> Okay. So, this is getting really interesting because I haven't looked at this in this with this lens since we really dug into the facility joint facility committee and also the athletic council work. And this really has me thinking about our rooms that are used for sack and the cost it takes to run them and the use. And also makes me think just as a matter of reviewing the remainder of these policies, maybe we should just go through and familiarize oursel with the the um [sighs and gasps] the topics that we're going to go

030through because there might be these other connections. But one of the policies, it's not on this list, but it is the community use policy. And as I've reviewed that policy and considered bringing forth changes, this child care piece could go right into that. And so, do we need a separate policy about child care if it should be in the community use policy? Because I if we if this policy is to be about FCPS's child care spaces, that's one thing, but it currently talks about other community uses and we already have a policy that does that, not very clearly. But if we're trying to make things as strong as we can focused, I kind of want to put a pause in this and say, okay, because there's a lot of stuff we're still trying to figure

031out with that. So, um, Miss St. John Cunning, I guess, and then Mr. Fish. >> Yeah, I you just kind of got my brain thinking in a different way. Um I I think what's important to realize is finding the balance because particularly in certain areas, mine in particular, some of those programs, this the the SAC program, the child care programs are essential for our families and they because they are in the school, those professionals work with the teachers and so by de facto they kind of become like an extra even though they're being operated by the county the employees are working with teachers and they're helping kids are kind of tutoring them they're kind of working hand inand with them that's kind of a unseen benefit that that we see happening for our kids and

032that is also a benefit for our parents that they know that their kids are in a safe space they're with their friends they're with you know so many times Sometimes it's the sack person that is telling the parent when they're picking them up, this is what happened in class. This was their homework. This is how I help them with it. Um I I think, you know, we have to be familiar with what's happening down in the ground, you know, with with these kids. Uh and with these programs, um and see that they are in a lot of ways they are true partners with us. And it's a benefit. the space issue. It's like six in one hand, half a dozen in the other type of situation because it does benefit our kids and it does

033benefit our parents. >> Dr. Anderson, not Mr. Fisher. Um, I hear what you're saying about community use and since that is still yet to be determined, um, I would be very comfortable in moving forward with this, but as we are looking through the community use, if it makes sense to fold it in, let's go ahead and fold it in at that time. There's nothing that means we we have no restrictions on how many times we could review a policy. We just have so many of them that we don't get a chance to do that on a frequently enough basis. But we could go move this forward today and it gets voted upon and in three months we fold it into community use and we sunset it. I I I don't think we need to pick

034and choose. I think this could move forward until it is no longer um applicable. >> I'm with you like 90% of the way there, but where I got tripped up was that it says that the host school principal shall be the responsibility of the endorsing agency. And I'm not sure if that's saying that the principal has to be accountable for this because again I see a lot of um at the number four responsibilities the coordination of the activities with the host principal shall be the responsible of the endorsing agency which I guess would be us. What I I want to avoid is putting anything more on principles than they're already doing. And I see how things happen currently where there's a lot of expectations about community use put on the principles and what they're supposed

035to be doing. So are we clear that that's not what this is saying? Mr. Fr, your thoughts? >> Whatever it says, we aren't putting more on this is currently on, right? Because it's not underlined in red. So it's currently the policy. >> So there's essentially no changes to this policy really, right? >> Oh, it was added. It's not in red, but shouldn't it be in red? The school board, that's new language, correct? The school board recognizes the operation of childcare centers as an important community service. Because if that is the only change, then sure, I can I can live with that. Let's just take a second. >> Miss Marin. >> Yes, Dr. Reed. [clears throat] >> I I think principles want to have a say in this, right? Because it's at their site [clears throat]

036in their building. So I anyhow so I think >> absolutely okay just as long as we're protecting against more >> Miss Brown >> on the old policy the language is the same. It's it's not that philosophy was added. It's the the child care services was renamed philosophy. So I'm happy to change that language if that's what you want. But that statement the school board recognizes is there in the original policy. >> They were ahead of their time. >> Okay. Shall we uh anyone want to move then to move this forward? Anybody new want to move it? Mr. Fr, do you want to move it? Marcia with your Yes, you move it. Okay. Uh Miss St. John Cunning. Oh, let me read the motion. My apologies. Uh let me get the script up. Thanks. >> You

037got it. >> Okay. So, we already have a motion on the table with Dr. Anderson movie. >> Oh, did you already apologies? >> My apologies. >> Oh, there. >> Okay. Also ahead of our time. Okay. Great. So, uh, the motion is up there. All in favor to move this policy forward. That's unanimous. Wonderful. And I did also resend you the whole link to all of those background materials, colleagues, in case you want that handy. Okay. The next one, maintenance of physical facilities 8560. >> [sighs] >> So, we have added a philosophy section. Mr. Fish, is your thing up? No. Dr. Anderson. Um I'm hoping that we could without objection instead of having those two sections which are four and five as office of facilities management and then a separate for the school principal that we

038could change number four to responsibilities and have those two be two paragraphs underneath it and then we won't need a section five. I'm not asking to change any language just the a title of the role the school principal that doesn't really align with anything else that we're doing but we have many roles and responsibilities. So if we have responsibilities you know trust policy that's always where I go because there was something for everybody. So responsibilities would be number four and then those two would be paragraphs underneath that. >> Yeah. >> I don't object to that. So just in the terms of our formatting that we want to do. So like a Roman numeral four. now again in the previous ones it's been different right? We've had the number two be the philosophy section and number

039three be the summary. So again we're going to give without objection the clerks the ability to make it all consistent. The order of intro um the purpose philosophy summary of changes. And now we're changing this particular one to responsibilities. Maybe we'll do that in others. But okay, clerks, let me know when you are good to move forward. Okay. So, Dr. Anderson has we got responsibilities that will be spellch checked. And then um is the office of facilities management still the correct name? That is the current name. Should it be changed to excuse me to chief instead of director? >> Well, that's what I'm Oh, >> under the supervision of the chief >> in the first sentence. >> Yes. Yes. Instead of director. You're right, Miss Lady. Under the supervision of the director. Mr. Gordon, would

040you mind reciting your title for us so we have it right here since you're here? >> Chief of Facility Services and Capital Planning. And is office of facilities management still the overall office right or did we I don't have my org chart down >> right >> it is right okay thank you Mr. Fish did you have something more Mr. Fish >> oh Mr. Fish has more. Okay. >> So, as I've been working my way through the governance manual and finding all kinds of things that we used to call it this way, >> I worry about creating future problems in policies by identifying >> the exact >> um >> we talked we did talk about this. You're right. We were going to just put superintendent every time. >> We talked about this. >> That is it.

041the superintendent designate as the catch all. And then that way if um a future superintendent >> in like in like 2040 >> Yes. >> 2050 >> um decides that they're going to change how they structure things. We don't have to change every policy. >> So Mr. Fresh, you're reminding me. I think what I'd like to what I'd like to offer the committee is soon after this meeting, sending the lists that I compiled through last year and I think beginning of this year with all these kinds of things and then maybe we could actually agree on them. >> Maybe carve out like 10 minutes at the next meeting. >> I like that idea. >> I like that. Okay, let me just write that down on my >> Although I will say it is fun to find

042names of offices that haven't been in the name of that office since like 1983 or whatever. Um, so it's like a it's like Yeah, it's like a treasure hunt. >> I found the word tape recorder recently. Um, >> yeah, I'm pretty sure we say his or her, but that's one of those things also. So, let me pull up that thing again without objection, giving the clerk's authority to or flexibility to change there to his or her or somehow make it gender neutral some other way. >> Well, just to be clear, we wouldn't be putting the department name here either, would we? >> No, the superintendent or >> under the super. So delete everything before under. Yeah. Great. [laughter] >> It could also just be their designate. But >> yeah, that's but I think we had

043that discussion and we're trying to make it standard. So that's >> should be there >> even though it's singular superintendent. >> I know. So that >> but his or her >> I know >> is not inclusive. >> I'm with you. And so let's let me share what I've collected as we've said before, right? And then let's make a decision. I agree with you, Mr. Fish. And then so also strike the office of facilities management in the second sentence, right? Um the superintendent shall be you know or is charged or shall be shall and may you know how that goes shall be charged with how about just developing can we cut out charge with the responsibility charged with developing maintenance is that okay >> in the second paragraph to remove the office of facilities screen. >>

044It's just removing the not just but it is removing office of OFM which is also in the last line on this page as well. And then do we want to be dictating here what the school principal does and what the custodians do since that's pretty operational. >> I don't think we need to. So thoughts on that? Are we striking that language too that is very specific? >> The last should be the superintendent or >> provides oversight >> or designate same as the second reference in the in the paragraph above. I actually have a question. When we say the superintendent, is it like a royal we like? Do you read that in our policies? If it just said the superintendent, is your design implicit? Or do you like having a clear line between things that the

045board is expecting you personally to do versus things that they're saying that you should delegate given that we've on a macro sense given you ability to designate to delegate everything? When I see superintendent, I I know [clears throat] I'll I'll be held accountable. Whoever I put in charge of it, which is true. >> So, how about just the superintendent? We don't have to put or designate. Again, word economy, right? >> I like it. Capital. I think we should capitalize it. Okay. So, I will note that down in one of those formatting things. >> Okay. Uh Fish, are you all good? Uh Dr. Anderson. I'm sorry. I just I was looking can we be consistent in the in the semantics with the first paragraph to say that the superintendent shall be responsible for safeguarding the public

046interest the public investments yada yada yada instead of all of those words under the supervision of the super I mean that's a given under who else will be supervising that >> so the superintendent shall um shall safeguard or be responsible. Just something like that. That shall safeguard. How about that? The public's investment. >> Public facility assets, right? I like using that term. Public facility assets. That's what we've been using more. >> There you go. >> Yeah, that that works. And then in the second paragraph, just let me know when you're ready. um instead of the school princ >> wouldn't we delete all of the other things after that up to by ensuring >> I'm sorry I can't really see what she's got going on there >> it says public's facility assets I think that would

047be inclusive of school physical facilities grounds and equipment >> I'm agnostic over that but that's fine >> the phrase that's been being used when we're doing the CIP work to safeguard >> public school facility assets. >> Gotcha. That's been the phrase we're trying to >> be more consistent. Public school facility assets. >> Would that be inclusive of phys um I'm sorry, grounds and equipment? >> Yes. >> Orion. Okay. >> It's all the things. So, not not the not just >> Okay. >> Just public school facility assets. >> All right. And then >> well I was just making a statement. >> We'll vote on it but >> and then with the second paragraph instead of the school principles since we're should it be that the superintendent shall um provide oversight it you know dot dot dot

048and then in the regulations she can specify that this is going to be a principal responsibility. >> Thoughts? >> Just say thumbs up. Just say yes. [laughter] Say again. There you go. All of the above. Is that all for now? I I will say I'm happy to approve this today to get it moving, but I think I'm going to bring some language at the deis to add something akin to what we've been talking about with the joint facility committee, which is recognition that our schools are used for more than instruction because it it's coming to constantly on us that we have to maintain it and our dollars and our instructional dollars are going more and more to maintenance. So, um would that be part of the philosophy? >> I I don't know, but I can't

049do it right now. So, I'd rather bring it to the full board um at that time. So, shall we um Oh, Mr. Fisher >> and maybe language that's reused in the [clears throat] what is it? 85 I just had it might be. Never mind. It's not an important point. >> I can't find it. Go ahead. >> Okay. Okay. Great. So, it looks like we're good. This is pretty basic. And um responsibilities up there. >> No, no, no, no, no, no, no. >> No. >> Do we want to do that, Dr. Reed? >> Yes. >> So, so you don't want it named a school principal when it's their facility? >> Okay. I mean, I definitely think it's the responsibility of the principal to do that for their >> Well, I mean, here's here's what we get

050into with policy, right? Like if the board really wants it to be the principles, then they should tell the superintendent that we really want it to be the principles. Otherwise, a future superintendent who may not agree with the current superintendent that it should be the principles could decide that somebody else gets to do it. Alternatively, the board could update its policy if that happens. So, you know, >> I'm comfortable with how it is. I have no objection. >> Sorry. I have no objections if you want to leave it as a school principal [clears throat] because I thought we could cover that in the regulations because at the end of the day, that's who's going to do it. >> And I think the regulation needs to speak to some of the issues that when people are

051not routinely walking in your building, especially in summer, um that they need to be, right? I mean, we got 200 facilities. That's why I'd rather say um the school principal And I don't know if we want to say oversight of the physical facility or you can say oversight of the we have other facilities that don't have a principal in them. Right. So is that >> superintendent? >> I agree. I'm thinking out loud. Right. Because we definitely have facilities that don't have a principal. So maybe just in regulation it it will work. So >> yeah and I think again getting away from physical facility and more towards that public school facility assets because that has been all all-encompassing to a building like you know even gate house. I think also the logic then applies to removing

052the sentence about the custodians. There could be something in the future where different schools are cleaned differently you know and again it is one group of employees and that also I wonder is collective bargaining implications like [sighs] >> well it is interesting because they don't say anything about your building supervisor they reference custodians again I I'm comfortable if that were to come out and just be if it needs to be part of regulation be part of regulation >> I I'm really pleased with where this is headed and I think as we do more of the facility work and then maybe go around these policies, it'll get even better. So, okay. Um, so are we ready to move this? >> Not quite, because the change to use the public school facility assets a second time kind

053of screws with the verbiage that follows >> to ensure. Okay. Take out its. >> It might work if it just was asset. >> Sure. I don't know. shall provide oversight of the public school facility asset to ensure its cleanliness and ensure >> it's also not always just buildings, it's fields, its parking lots. So that's why that public school facility asset phrase is something we're trying to use all the time. Then this should be shall provide oversight of the public school facility assets to ensure cleanliness >> safety access that it's accessible. I mean, this is opening a can of worms, but yeah. Yeah. I mean, also >> I think the problem is that this policy is clearly this part of the policy at least is clearly about it was written for a school building. >> And

054so what we're now trying to do is drive a comprehensive all of our assets onto the language that was defined for a school building. So, >> what do you what do you say if we pause and go to the next one and see because I'm just wondering if all of these have this element like are we going to have to come back and like I can I can commit to working after this to try and bringing a next round with edits that weave these things together because you're right Mr. I mean the title is maintenance of facility. A physical facility is well parking lot is a physical facility building but there also I just want to say Miss Browner uh deputy clerk and I had worked through trying to understand where things were in their

055cycle of being reviewed. [sighs] This one and environmental stewardship have been redlined. The rest had not been Are they redlined now? Shoot. Okay. Do people want to hammer this out or do we want to move on a little bit? I think that there's a world of difference between making a couple changes here and there to something at the in a meeting and being able to say like clearly this paragraph needs some work. If we could identify what we'd like the paragraph to do, staff can change that and bring it back for the next meeting. And I think what I've heard thus far in the conversation around that final paragraph is that we want a paragraph that speaks to the superintendent's responsibility to provide oversight of our public school facility assets. Um, and then what that

056oversight includes. It could include uh to include but not limited to cleanliness, blah blah blah blah blah. list the whole litany of the types of things that they'd be responsible for. Um, knowing that most of the time we're talking about schools, but there's a lot of other things that happen uh in the school division as well. Knowing all that, they bring us back the paragraph and it's much closer and probably saves us a lot more time than words smithing something entirely new. >> All right. What do others think? Shall we set this aside for right now? Do and Mr. Fris did just give some clear direction. Uh, Miss uh, St. John Cunning. >> No, I I'm actually I I agree with Mr. fresh just by reading this and I actually sidebar with uh Miss Lady

057just because of the specific wording and trying to figure out where policy ends and where regulations begin because some of this wording like I know how the principal doesn't generate the work orders somebody else does you know the custodians the building supervisor and then the way we've divided it is for a school building as and saying the school principal shall but you know we have buildings um that like Virginia Hills there's not a school principal so but there there's somebody there that's in charge of the building. So, I do think that we should send it back with that kind of direction for clarity if we're going to make it more encompassing for all assets versus just school buildings that are being used as schools. You know, we have done Lauren, we have Wilton Woods, um

058we have so many like of several in my region, Virginia Hills that are used as Lee Center. So, uh, Superintendent Reed, do you feel you have the notes needed to update the policy as such? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. >> I'm sorry. Just one more thing because we might be able to give this guidance as well. Um, where it says maintenance of excuse me, [clears throat] physical facilities collectively, I think we on the same page of using the new language when we're talking about it. So it should be public school >> facility asset >> public school facility assets there maintenance of public school facility assets and then um because we've changed um this section to not need to iterate out responsibilities since we're putting them all under the superintendent. Uh that section needs a new

059title other than responsibilities which could be um uh responsibility for maintenance or something like that. But just know that it doesn't make sense to put responsibilities for one person, you know. So, >> okay, >> maybe come back with some ideas there. Okay. So, we will leave that one be for now. And heading back to the superintendent, the next one up is 8552 environmental stewardship. I love this one. >> Yeah. >> This looks like a lot because there's strike through and underline. >> Mr. Fish, would you like to speak a bit about it? I know you spent some time on it. >> Yeah. Um so uh in 2021 the board finished year three years of work on the joint environmental task force with the board of supervisors when both the board of supervisors and the school

060board adopted the recommendations of the joint environmental task force which included board members, community members, students, a whole bunch of people and we worked on it was me and Miss Tolen and Before that, it had been Dalia and or excuse me, Supervisor Palic and um Pat Hines from Hunter Mill um and I believe that and and Miss Corbett Sanders from Mount Vernon. Um and we worked on the recommendations which were into various categories including conser energy conservation, transportation, uh facilities and so on. um uh waste uh recycling um and so what resulted was what became the joy the jet directives um and so the policy did not speak to those things even though the board adopted it um and uh that's why we find ourselves here >> okay so weaves together a lot of stuff

061Dr. Anderson. >> Yes. I'm going to jump into this if that's okay. Hopefully trying to chunk it by page. On the first page, um um purpose summary is fine. Philosophy, this is one of the first ones that we're looking at that says FCPS. All of the others have said the FCPS school board. So, I suggest that we make that change. Um that the school board because this is the school board's document to um to the division. So, the school board, the Fairfax County School Board is dedicated to. So, that's one um that I'd like to offer. Should I pause here? >> Uh I agree. And also take out the uh we commit because that's not the same person's voice. So, making that >> Okay, thank you. Um yes, I mean I went to move on.

062It got really hot in here. There's a lot of heat coming in here right now. >> We're having thermostat issues >> and I'm always cold. >> If hot then it must be hot. >> Okay. So, let's So, um, philosophy seems okay. And then, so we'll go to the definition. >> Um, um, philosophy is okay. And then the back page. Oh, shoot. I completely missed definition. I don't have a thought on that, but I'm going to go to where I have thoughts. the responsibilities and I know we this was raised a few years ago when the jet committee concluded its work and it was adopted by FCPS so therefore by the by the board so therefore it's the board's work I am not sure if I see the utility of kind of having this history lesson

063here not under responsibilities um it should be who's responsible for what and this does not convey say that as far as I'm concerned um just speaks to the history upon which the jet was founded and how it came to be. The board already adopted those recommendations so it's irrelevant to me. I I would also take a turn to say that um it captures the genesis behind it. But should it be under responsibilities? That's the question. >> Maybe it's more under purpose and we get back to the formatting that we >> and a lot of other places, but responsibilities. I'm looking for somebody is going to be it's going to be their duty to complete this thing. The way that we just had that long discussion about the the school buildings and the physical assets, you're

064going to be responsible for a particular thing. There's no more responsibility to the jet because it no longer exists. That task force is dead. Um so that's one. Um and then my other question is regarding the next three sections that speak to carbon neutrality, gle green globes. Uh I guess those two sections I'm wondering both of these are um activities to get to a a better environmental place. Should they be captured under one heading that has those two as two separate activities? So that's a wondering. Um, so I'll pause here. Mr. Fish, did you want to comment? >> Yeah. Uh, I agree on the jet information being under responsibilities being a little off, but it could be um something like context or um the you know the school board's charge or something like that. uh

065other than responsibilities. In terms of uh items six and uh seven, I'm fine with them being separated out because they're independent things. Um uh as is number eight and number nine and number 10, they're all independent things that have specifics that we're asking the superintendent and company to drive towards. Um, but I I do think that um the jet information is helpful. If it does get struck, then we're going to have to change the way that it's used throughout the document because we use the jet um uh because it's used in parenthesis the first time we use jet throughout for the rest of the document. Um, but I would, you know, be in favor of changing the heading for number five to um, historical context. >> Dr. Anderson, do you have more comments? >> Um,

066I I mean, I appreciate what the jet did, but we don't really offer historical context in these documents, per se. I I think it's okay to let it go because even the language that we have here, it's not even the jet provides a form of collaboration in alignment. It's not providing anything right now. It's no longer a functioning committee. I I think it's perfectly okay because we have the judge show up in so many other places up to when all of the um all of their recommendations were adopted. I don't think it lives in the policy per se. So I actually I don't know if we I don't see the utility at all for that kind of history lesson here. >> Okay, Dr. That concludes your comments for now or Yeah. Okay. Uh, Miss St.

067John Cunning. >> Um, so for me, first of all, I don't think it should be responsibilities. I agree with this, but for me, this informs what comes down below it. I know what you're saying like the jet doesn't exist, but what this policy is saying that as we move forward with, you know, you go down to the other points, carbon neutrality, everything that what we want to be looking at is we want to be looking at how we can reach these goals um of environmental sustainability which is you know transportation, capital improvement, recycling. It kind of gives you the big umbrella and then we get a little bit more specific. Um so to me it'sformational for someone that's reading this and looking at it. It's kind of giving a an overall direction and then we

068get into the specifics of the green globes carbon neutrality uh classroom environment. I find it valuable. Um I'm just putting my two cents and saying that that helps me understand and it's giving a direction and thank you. I'll go ahead and take a another turn. So I suggest that under philosophy we add a sentence that says you know this policy is driven by the jet work that concluded in this year and is embedded throughout the document >> with the full name so that people know >> exactly and then perhaps we remove jet because as you I mean you always say right it's our goals it's not the directive it's like it just is what it is um so that's my suggestion is the work is done by the work of you know or is guided

069or is That's >> well it could this work is driven by >> the adopted recommendations of the joint environmental task force parenthesis jet which concluded its work in July 2021. Yeah, >> we could even did we have a vote a formal vote. Yeah. So we could cite that this way people >> it was uh it's dated in the in July 21. >> Great. I think that would be really great. Um, the other thing is I like that this policy has all the topics in it, but it's really about facilities management. And so when it gets to talking about um transportation and um school-based environmental action, as much as I love that stuff, it's not really here that it should be. And workforce development as well. Now, alternatively, I actually am really interested in updating our

070instructional policy, our curriculum, whatever the policy is, to add more of that in. So, I'm okay to include it for now because I'd rather have it than not, but it's um it's not exactly on point, but so I welcome your thoughts. So I guess I am proposing that that summary of jet go into that philosophy section and then I am asking for and then we remove we change responsibilities. It's got to be something more about the superintendent will do this or we don't have one responsibility section, but that content has to go away. And then um I'm okay with I I ask for your input on whether to keep all those different sections and then also then second question is do we just remove the reference to the jet for the rest of the policy?

071So um Mr. FR and then Dr. Anderson. Um so I support the change made for the philosophy and eliminating responsibilities because it no longer serves a purpose in the policy there. Uh in terms of the other things that are iterated throughout um I think we keep those until we change elsewhere. Um and um you know part of the reason that these things are in there is because uh previously the departments were one right facilities and transportation. Um, and I think for ease of use, the policy is called sustainability and environmental stewardship. So, they've included other things that relate to environmental stewardship. Um, and that's always going to be the rub as a policy maker is, okay, well, if something is environmental stewardship, do we now need five policies because everything has a piece of it?

072And if that's the case, do we want to amend five policies every time we have a change? So we can decide that it is appropriate to include these things in this policy because it is more overre o overarching. Um but this is one of those policies that is far more detailed than the typical policy as well. When they are very detailed is when they could easily be broken up into pieces for different policies, but those pieces wouldn't live alone either. They'd likely end up in other other policies. So it gets complicated really quickly and it doesn't have to necessarily. >> Okay. Thank you. I have comments but Dr. Anderson first. >> Um yes very quickly. Um I think under you know I still go back to what I shared a little bit earlier. I think

073these can be grouped a little bit differently and I was starting to do that and I didn't have enough time. carbon neutrality, um green globes, um building and classroom environment, indoor quality, um those transportation, water management, grounds and landscaping practices, watershed management, get to green, those are very different activities or different things components than workforce development, then purchasing and performance measures. as they are listed, they come across as kind of listing that are of the same thing. So, I'd like for that consideration. Um, under carb carbon neutrality um the first sentence that starts with FCPS is committed to the overarching goal of being carbon neutral. Um, one I I think our commitments have been living under philosophy and I definitely support what you've provided in terms of moving all that jet language into under philosophy

074and I I don't think we need to have Jet here. Again, Jet goal, the Jet goals no longer exist once FCPS adopted it. Once the school board adopted it, we have school board goals that were based upon JET, but Jet no longer exists. So, I think we need to remove Jet from here and also consider the commitment moving under philosophy, but I'm not that's not a hill to die on. Um I I guess I'm trying to find the language that speaks to what is it that we're going to accomplish or require and that starts with you know to supple to have measures to achieve carbon neutrality by 2040 and then what it means. Should we have a definition section? Um that's also a wondering because some of these are kind of a little bit more

075technical than others. Um, I I would love to have a definition section that speaks about carbon neutrality rather than having it be embedded in the body of direction to the superintendent. Um, I I'll just stop there. So, can I make a recommendation? It would be such a huge thing to be able to pass this policy. Like, it's been two years in the making and it would just be like next level, you know? So I'm wondering this can we move forward with the changes we talked about the change in the philosophy to recognize JET keeping Jet in there for now move it to the board and we're going to be talking about the CIP we can adjust this policy at the deis it's a great time to do that work but can we get it out

076of this committee so that it can be in consideration and see the light of day and I also do just want to say we have 45 minutes left I do want to be sure we get to the HR policies because our chief has been sitting here. So, um, so I don't know if I he was sitting here. He's just went out, but um, so I don't know if I can't make the motion, but I would make the motion to move this policy with the change. >> Miss M, I do just want to note that I recommend we change the summary of changes to this uh, policy has been changed in its entirety, which is what we normally do when we have such big changes like this. >> Good. Yeah, that would be I agree with

077that. Yes, Mr. Fish. >> [laughter] >> So um well we did without objection the change in the philosophy. So the motion Mr. Fr is that motion. >> Can I second it? I'll second it. Well as chair I don't know. Uh do you want to speak? >> I already have. Anyone else? Let's pass the policy. All in favor? Oh, four in favor. Opposed. >> Go green. Yay. I'm going to call Lane. >> Okay. >> All right. Uh, just one second here. So, colleagues, just to do a time check here. We're doing great. So we have got four more CIP policies. Okay. And we have a few HR policies. Does anyone have top of mind the HR policies things that they definitely want to talk about? My understanding is that they were pretty straightforward. So do we

078maybe just and I know Mr. Mr. Solomon is headed back here, but do we just want to take a few minutes, switch gears, go to HR because I wouldn't want to have had him. Oh, it's my party. Okay. So, without objection, if we could just switch gears, look over the items in agenda. Item 1.05. Oh, there's a lot. >> Okay. Um, madame deputy clerk, can you remind us actually, can you remind us which of the HR policies we've already looked at? And I see if you look on board doc's uh, colleagues, it'll say the versions with Carl's edits which were about philosophy. Isn't that correct? Okay. So, Mr. Solomon, we're just looking over those policies to see to remind ourselves what we've seen before because we wouldn't want you to have to been here in

079vain all night. So, so let's just take a few minutes and get our bearings. And but we did look at some of these at a committee prior though, a committee meeting prior, didn't we? >> We did. >> Yeah. So, all seven have been reviewed at a prior governance committee. Correct. >> Because Mr. Fresh Yeah. Yeah. Mr. Fresh brought up um So, all seven have edits from Mr. Fr. Mr. FR brought up the edits and said, "Does everyone agree with these?" And we bring them back to a later meeting and and and put them through and everyone said yes. And so that's why they're here. >> Right. So the bulk of the So again, we wanted to be sure at some point in the past that all of these held up with the collective bargaining now

080in place and I think we had had questions about why some were being addressed and others. Let me take a look. 4120 is up. >> So, I would propose that we go through each of the versions that have Carl's philosophy edits as well as they have edits of other things there. I just saw one that had quite a few because we had asked about why some policies call it operational policies. Um, we do also want to be sure that we're not referencing the chief as we had already discussed tonight. We're just going to repres talk about the superintendent in our policies. So, those will have to be done. Thank you. Okay. So, we're going to start um Sure. Okay. So, Dr. Start with 4120. Uh, right, Dr. >> Yep. 4120 under philosophy. I'd like to

081add the Fairfax County School Board recognizes that. Again, trying to be consistent with the language of the others. Um, that's it. And then I'm happy to move it. Okay. And Mr. Fresh. >> I'm okay with that. So, can we just >> Sure. So can we just articulate um exactly what we expect will be changed um so we are articulating that um one second. So for the HR policies um removal of reference to any staff other well any design so it will just reference the superintendent. Um if there's any cleanup to the philosophy language that says it is the statement of that it will be changed to the Fairfax County School Board shall adhere recognizes believes and I will send that stock starter language as well. Okay. Um of course the formatting and the order is

082checked. other things that we would give the clerks the flexibility the order I did yes I did just say that yes the order of the section is checked and if there is a discrepancy so let's say we give this approval now and the clerks have a question um how do we want to we actually have a governance committee meeting coming up fairly soon but hopefully that would only happen like one yeah >> it's the 20th we have >> January 20th Okay. You could reach out to me, but like am I I don't know that I'm empowered to make a substantive decision. You know, >> what we what we can do is these will be on new business for 18. So, we can put them on new business for 18. If we have any questions, we

083can ask at the top of 120 so that they are and have them ready for consent or action for 122. That way, we can keep the trains moving if that works. >> That's okay with me. So, are there any um other particular comments specific to a I for me I want to just reiterate I wanted to be sure that nothing in here was contrary to collective bargaining. So there are some things in here that still surprise me, but >> you just procedures for suspension or under 4270 in terms of their topic, not what's in them, but just that. But I'm okay with it. It's been that is I think it gets back to that question of you know do we have to say it directly you know who is the designate or not like I

084don't know it just kind of in that area but It's I am clear about it. Okay. Um I'm just looking through them one more time. 4411. So like for instance in 4411 it says general duties. So that would have to match up with responsibilities. I just want to make that I do have a question for 4411 >> under protections. Um, Mr. Foster, should we have any references to the collective bargaining under protections for 4411? Yeah. Do you have it in front of you? Your eyes are better than mine because I couldn't see from back there. >> That distance is good for me. That's up close. It's a problem. [laughter] >> We all have our troubles. >> I definitely have a distance. >> Can you move the document further along, please? >> Thank you. >> It

085says, "On request, the on request, the school board shall make available legal counsel to advise employees of his or her rights and obligations." Um I I'm just wondering like does collective bargaining live here and if so how? >> Right. I I think that um you know this document stands on it on its own. I I would not recommend that we start cross referencing the collective bargaining agreement. Um and I think it's fine as is. >> Mr. Fish >> corre if I'm wrong, [clears throat] Mr. Foster, but the collective bargaining agreement has language about being in compliance with schoolboard policy and regulations. So that gives us a catchall. Um I think where um we'd have to worry about policy is anything that undermines uh the ability of of employees related to their bargaining. So uh things

086about discipline or whatnot. um our our policy. And if they wanted, they could try and bargain changes and the superintendent would come to us as part of the collective bargaining process and say they would like to bargain for a change to this policy as part of their agreement and then the board would have to, you know, update the policy if that ended up being something that was included in the policy. >> Thank you, Mr. Fr. It's a good reminder. Uh Miss John Cunning. Um, so I don't have a problem with this because this is very specific to us as a school system being responsible to jobrelated assault and battery against an employee. I mean, it's that's what it's talking about. It's not talking about other us providing legal counsel for other things. It's very specific

087to like providing that like workplace if they get assaulted and something in our school system. I don't know how this I mean I'm sure it fits somewhere into collective bargaining but this is us taking some ownership of that. Is is that correct? Like I don't know. I'm just I don't understand the legal ease about it, but it's kind of like saying that if you're a teacher and you know somebody comes and which I have seen somebody comes and pops you [laughter] that they're they're we're going to provide them legal counsel if they have to press charges against assault and because it's very specific to jobrelated assault and battery. >> Yes, it it is very specific. So I I agree. I guess I mean clearly we've all been here long enough to know that when something

088happens we tend to dump it into the policy. Um is this something that we need to be this specific because there are other things that could happen to employees besides assault and battery for which we should be supporting them. I guess Mr. Also, I'm looking to you to share why is this here? Is there a code that is specific to assault and battery? Because there are other circumstances that we would need to provide the same support and assistance. >> I don't know the reason why. I mean, if there's a specific incident from years ago that prompted the the policy, I just don't know. Um, sitting here, I was going to pull up the Virginia code section to see if there's any reference in there. Um >> because this is speaking to something I was talking

089with Dr. Reed about this morning. If an employee is um is under What's that? It's in my email. Yay. Um, but if an employee is um is being um part of a lawsuit in the regular course of their duties, then they're protected, which is what's on the back page here. Um, which I wish I had remembered that that was here. Um, I don't know. This just seems very specific and maybe there's other circumstances we could be broadening this language to cover. Mr. First, did you have or I don't know. >> Yes. So, the the the [clears throat] Virginia code section does authorize as the policy provides for legal fees to be paid. Um Yeah. Right. Yeah. So I it there is a certainly a Virginia code basis for what's outlined in the policy, >> but

090not necessarily speaking to assault and battery protections. >> The Virginia code section is broader. >> It's broader. >> Should we and should we have broader language because there could be some other things that are happening to employees beyond assault and battery for which we need to provide protection as this is labeled. >> Right. it that really is a dis decision for the board in the um updating of its policy. I think the code provides the board the ability to do that. Whether you want to do that is up to you. >> I mean, I kind of think we should. Do we have any of the SBA language here to consider? I don't think we do for this one. >> I mean, I'd like to >> He says it's broader. I don't know. Can you read

091what the code says? Miss um St. John Cunning just asked. >> Yeah, when you were saying it was >> if an employee of a school board is arrested, indicted or otherwise prosecuted on any charge arising out of any act committed in the discharge of his duties as such employee and such charge is subsequently dismissed or a verdict of not guilty is rendered. or if an employee um of a school board has made a defendant in any civil action arising out of his actions in connections with his duties as such employee, the school board may pay the legal fees and expenses of such employee. >> So that speaks to what's on the back page. It doesn't speak to the assault and battery specifically. I I is it something that we want to consider not having because

092it is so specific or to just have language that we shall make available legal counsel like under what other circumstances would we provide legal counsel if an employee is in some sort of um circumstance in the course of their duties. I just think we need to be closer to the code language. >> I think I would agree with being closer to the code language. I also like providing protections and writing to the staff. So, is it clear what language we could put in now or does that need to be developed? It would have to be developed. >> What? Remind me what number that is, please. >> 4411. for the board's consideration. One thing I would share is if you're considering broadening that language, remember the scope is narrow right now. So I might advise costing

093out what it would look like to expand the scope. >> I don't want to expand it. I just want to make it a little bit more high level because Mr. Solomon, perhaps you're aware, perhaps you know, this is very specific as Miss Centraling talked about with assault and battery like those will not be the only two things for which we provide protections to staff. there could be some other circumstance. Do we have to be that narrow? >> Uh, that's a good question. So, as Mr. Foster shared, uh, the code is broader and allows school systems to be broader. However, I I would advise taking a look at and considering the financial implications of doing so. >> So, you're saying it's cheaper to just do assault and battery? I'm saying that it's in addition to the

094cost, it's also a good idea to look at the division's risk tolerance and make a decision from there. >> And the protections that we're providing is legal counsel. So, if you could juxtapose that with what's on the back page with Mr. which Mr. Faucet just talked about regarding um in their regular course of duty that we can provide um legal counsel and reimbursements. I don't know if you said reimbursements in what you read from the code. That could be anything outside of assault and battery. So, we already have to as per code even though it may be more costly to us. Mr. Foster, doesn't the code say may and this says shall? >> It says may. >> So, I will note that that the policy says shall and the code says may. So I guess

095I'd like to better understand why should we why must we provide supports on adult on adult on assault and battery but may everywhere else and then I'll stop monopolizing. I'm not aware of any Virginia code requirement that mandates a school board to u provide legal counsel to advise an employee of his rights and obligations. With resp I mean, I'm just reading from the policy. I'm not seeing anything in the Virginia code that mandates that. As the clerk noted, it's a may, not a shall. >> Correct, [clears throat] >> Mr. FR? All right, I'm going to try and make sense of the conversation we just had. [clears throat] Mr. Foster, correct me if I'm wrong, but what you all are saying is that the state says here are the many things that you may cover. And

096we looked at that and we said, of those things that we may cover, we will cover this one. So, we shall cover this one. And so we are in doing that saving ourselves of the potential litigation expense or risk as Mr. Solomon described it of all of the other things that were in the May category in the state code. Is that correct? >> Yes. Does that make sense, Dr. Anderson? >> Yes. >> All right. So, state code says here are the many things that you may cover. We look at that list and we've said we will cover or we shall cover this one. In doing so, we are only taking on the risk, the cost of this one thing. And we are therefore saying we will not take on the risk or cost of all

097of the other things that the state says that we can take on. That's why we say shall and they say may at the state level. If we wanted to cover all of the many things or four of the many things that the state code says that we can but are not required to cover. To Mr. Solomon's point is advising that we simply have a good understanding of what the risk threshold change means potentially from a financial perspective. So if I allow you to destroy one record from my collection, there's a value to that one record. If I allow you to destroy my entire collection, there's a bigger value to what I've lost. So we just I think the idea is if we expand it beyond or if we say may uh or follow the state

098language to a tea and say shall do all these things then we're taking on a bigger risk financially and Mr. Solomon is advising that if we do that we should know what that risk is before we do it. I imagine when the initial school board developed this policy, they were saying we are comfortable taking on the risk of this one type of thing that we will cover if an employee needs that coverage and we in essence are not comfortable taking on the risk of all of these other things. >> Thank you. Um, just one more thing, Mr. Foster, where it says here that the board shall make available legal counsel to advise, would that be up to representation in court or I will sit with you and give you a consultation and you go forward

099and do whatever you need to. >> It doesn't say up to and and including, you know, representing the employee in court. It talks about um advising of rights and obligations. Um and so I think in light of the express language that's there, I think a reasonable interpretation would be that it is for the purposes of advising but could be read to not require representation in court. >> Okay. So if it's advising, that means you'll just pretty it's a consultation. It's a conversation. Correct. >> I I'm uncomfortable with this. Thank you though, >> Miss St. John Cunning. And I don't know if anybody here would know the answer to this like in terms of collective bargaining like I I'm thinking if I'm an employee and something happens like if I would go to my union to

100help them help me with whatever is happening like this happened you I was working at a school you know maybe it was maybe it was a student maybe it was another employee that did this to me like is and I don't know if anybody in here has the answer with collective bargaining if the union provides the support. Is this like a double support type of thing? I I don't know. >> Is Steph writing an answer or so? And good evening everyone. I I would say that this is a situation where uh the employee could go to the union um may not necessarily go to the union but uh always has the ability all employees regardless of their membership status with the union are covered uh by the protections of the union. So they could go

101to the union but they wouldn't necessarily have to. Miss Lady, did you w to just for clarification that's different from pre collective bargaining union agreement because before we had the agreement you had to be a member of the it wasn't a union well we didn't have a CBA right >> we didn't have the CBA and I think that for our previous associations that was always a way for them to build their membership was to offer some type of insurance coverage while at the same time Fairfax County would also offer that same kind of protection. But uh I know that at the time it was the associations used it as a way to highlight additional insurance and it wasn't only the teacher associations but the principal associations and administrators did this provided the same coverages additional

102coverages. But now that there's a CBA, if someone's not a member of the union, they would still be represented because of the CBA. >> They if they chose to go to the union, they would have the ability to to have some kind of coverage. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. >> So, Dr. Anderson, did you have another comment? >> Just one quick follow-up question to what was said. We have and I heard what you said, Mr. Smith. If I'm a teacher, I'm not in the union because the teachers are in a union group, I will get the same coverage. What if I am a an employee that is not part of a group that is represented? What protections are provided to those kinds of employees? I I'm I'm just asking Mr. Smith. >> So, the only

103employees who aren't covered are our hourly employees. So, hourly employees outside of those employees with no benefits, all uh employees who have benefits are covered by uh a union here in Fairfax County. >> So, the second piece, the part on the second page of this document that says if an employee is engaged in the course of their duty and something occurs, those individuals will not be part of any coverage of any protections. Correct. An hourly employee. And as it states here though, on request, the school board shall make available that council if if requested. >> But if an hourly employee requested, they they they will get a note >> from the union. >> No, from us. >> I I guess I'm asking from us because of that second part. I just want to do a

104time check here. Is there something that is very specific that you could ask to be delivered to you or to us um for this policy? and can we move on the other policies either without this one or we'll take a vote on anombuds for all of them and then again it can be always addressed at the deis. So Dr. did you have any question you wanted to get on or >> my questions I just I'm not sure if they're being answered and I don't want to hold up any more time because I've asked a lot of questions on this. >> Okay. Well, um, well, thank you. So, do we want to do an ombbuds, uh, omnuds, ombus, not ombuds, omnibus on all of these HR policies to send them forward? Is there objection to doing

105all of these HR policies? Okay, there is objection. So, we'll do them. I wonder if with all but 4411. Okay. So, we're going to do an omnibus for all policies except for 4411. Let's get let's get this together. That's okay. Once the clerks have some language, we will move forward. If you are waiting, if you wanted to take a look at the four remaining policies under 1.04, are there any that are short that you think you could approve if you're waiting with nothing else to do? >> I say while we're waiting for the clerk, back to agenda item 1.04, you know, four of the CIP changes, those policy related changes. Of the four remaining that we haven't discussed this evening, are there any that are sort of quick to be able to do? Maybe not,

106but >> [sighs] >> Let me take a look. 320 you said. Okay. Way to go clerk team. Okay. So, there is a motion on the board. It's for action item 1.05 HR related policies. Would anyone like to make a motion? Miss St. John Cunning will move the motion. A second. Mr. Fr. Miss Tani, would you like to speak to the motion? No. Mr. Fr? No. All in favor of the governance committee moving all of the HR related policies except policy 4411 operational employee obligations and rights together as an omnibus motion as revised to the full board for adoption. All in favor? We have a unanimous vote for yes for that action. Okay. and then we will vote separately for um policy 4411 support employee obligations and rights. Is there a motion to move that if

107Mr. FR? A second. I can second it. Um Mr. Fr. any comments? I have no comments. Any other comments? Okay. So uh the motion that the governance committee sends policy 4411 support employee obligations and rights is revised to the full board for adoption. All in favor? We have Mr. FR, Miss Ley, Miss Sean Cunning, and myself opposed. Dr. Anderson. Okay. Well done, guys. Well done, folks, gals, people. Okay. So, we got 12 minutes. Thank you, Mr. Solomon and Mr. Foster. Okay. Long time coming. Okay. Looping back to agenda item. I'm sorry, Dr. What number was it again? Tell me. >> 8320. Uh, Dr. suggests that 8320 is perhaps fairly innocuous. 8320. Is it not innocuous? >> Oh, 8320. So, it's been revised to add a philosophy and responsibility statement. As a reminder, we've collectively pre-accepted

108the formatting and stylistic changes. >> Are we okay with the philosophy? It starts a different way, but >> I think that >> Oh, that's going to be okay. So, with that formatting. Okay. So, is there a motion to move policy 8320? I Okay, Miss um St. John Cunning 8320. Uh second, I can second it or you second, Miss Lady. Okay, great. Uh Miss uh St. John County, would you like to speak to your motion? Miss Lady, Mr. Fris, did you have something? I think this is really exciting. That's all I'm going to say. All right, I'm going to call the question. Um, all those in favor of the motion to send policy 8320 site and building acquisition. Wait, site and building acquisition. Wait a minute. 8320. Correct. >> Yes, >> because we do have an

1098230. Now I get it, Miss Brown. Okay. 8320. Site and building acquisition to the board for consideration. All those in favor, we are unanimous here to move policy 8320, site and building acquisition. Okay. All right. Any other ones you think that we could do? Leasing for school facilities >> 80 8230. >> Are you being serious? 80. Okay. 8230. >> In essence, the only thing that we need to fix in this are things that we've already said stylistically would be changed. Yes. >> School design. >> Right. So, it would remove number five. And again, I have captured all those and I will send them once I can just do a final read through. >> Superintendent reference. I mean, we've all >> Yeah. >> I also do think that once we get all these through, right, our

110intentions had always been let's get these approved and then we could look at them again holistically, especially for this one knowing that we had done the procurement one recently. like it feeds into this one. So, okay. Is there a motion to send policy 8230 forward? Mr. FR sends the motion. This is for 8230 school design. Um, Mr. Fresh moves. Is there a second? Dr. Anderson. Would either of you like to speak to your motion? No. Okay. So, we have the motion to send policy 8230, school design, um, as revised to the full board for adoption. All in favor? It's unanimous. Okay. Oh my gosh, this might be a record. Okay. Leasing, we have 8410 and 8310. Let's take a quick look. Mr. Fr. >> Um, >> which one? >> 8410. >> It looks like more

111redlinining, but it it really isn't a substantive matter. Um, the one that caught my eye, um, was, no, this is not the one that I was thinking of, but this one is similar. Um, it's they're basically just removing superfluous um, text and tightening up language here and there. I don't see a need to delay this one at all other than the stylistic changes we've been talking about. >> Thank you, Dr. Anderson. question. Should I be viewing this differently if it's in blue versus red? [laughter] >> I will I will say again the community use policy does have implications to this. So again, it will be nice to have this cleaned up for that. Any other comments on 8410? No. Do I have a motion to send this forward? Mr. Fresh moves to move policy uh

1128410 forward to the school board. A second. Miss Lady. Any comments from the motion makers? No. Any comments from other members? Uh Mr. Fresh moved and Miss Lady seconded. All those in favor of sending 8410 leasing for school facilities to the board. We got a unanimous >> 8310. Let's try 8310 site planning and development. Mr. Fr. >> All right. Um, so the only thing that sticks out in this one is under landscaping. Um, and uh that uh we're removing the PTA, local garden clubs, etc., etc. Um but I I have heard from uh various principles about things that have been unintentionally destroyed. Like there were like some kids gardening activities that were kind of plowed over. So I get that and that's not to say that these groups are not being invited in there are

113many volunteers that help the kids with uh their school gardens. So it's not to say that they're not engaged in the school community anymore. I think it's just being a little bit more specific about what's allowed and what's not. Other than that, the only other big substantive substantive change is that uh we're adding that they've changed the acreage for middle and high uh and added the senior high or combined school. Um everything else uh either points to the guidelines uh or uh adds the philosophy. So I'm fine with it. >> Okay. Dr. Harrison. >> Yes. Um and this is speaking about size. So would it be a good assumption, I guess Mr. Smith, I'm not sure if you have this information, Dr. agreed that when sites such as Bailey's Upper that do not meet the

114acreage requirement that it would go through this um waiver process to the board itself because Bailey's Upper is not 4.5 acres, >> right? Um >> you approved the school. Yeah, you do approve that we do a school. I'm sorry, which paragraph are you referring to? >> Um, paragraph that speaks to size number four. >> Five. New five. >> Well, the Oh, okay. Yes. >> New five. >> It says B. It's that basic acreage. >> Any requests for waiver or requirement minimum size shall be approved by the school board. So, we're approving living outside of what's provided here. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um, I will say as much as I want to have a full set of all these things done on our agenda, there's a few things in here again looking with the facility

115lens like landscaping the new sea talks about artificial turf will be installed on stadium fields wherever possible. And this is a big sticking point um for community use and there's a budgetary aspect and I know there's other options the superintendent's looking into. I also wonder if landscaping what we're really talking about is the planning of the landscaping not the upkeep of it which was what Mr. FR was really talking about that once it's installed ensuring that staff know not to, you know, take things out that are so um I don't know. I I need more than three minutes to kind of think this one over, but I'm also okay to send it forward and work on it for the CIP discussion. So, those are my hesitations. Mr. Fris, did you have a comment? >> Yeah.

116Um I can envision if there's a need for a change around first of all the the term artificial turf does not is agnostic to the type of artificial turf right so thankfully because I think since we've been on the board we've gone through two iterations of the types of things that we value so I think that provides a lot of flexibility to staff around what is used I think the point there is even with the expense upkeep of athletic facilities ities on non artificial turf can be quite expensive. Um, and that's one of the it's also not necessarily as safe. So, it's one of the reasons that we do artificial turf. So, I agree with you that if this was being prescriptive to the type of turf, for example, we've replaced many of the football

117stadium turfs with basically professional grade used by the NFL u as part of that pilot. If we were saying that is what you must use, I would probably want something a little bit more broad, but it's pretty broad. It's just saying that we will use artificial. >> Thank you for that. Do you have any comments? No, Miss St. John Cunning. >> And and just specifically to the artificial turf, I just want to add that that's an equity issue. I remember there was a time when, you know, on my side of the county, there were several fields that didn't have artificial turfs and the football team really felt less than and other team members would make fun of them as less than. Um, I am not a football player. I don't know what is better to

118play on, but I do know how the community and the students felt about that. So to me it becomes an equity issue that it should be um you know throughout our entire division it should be the same because those kids like they would be called in the huddle west poor for not having artificial turf. So we can't have kids feeling that way. >> Okay Dr. Anderson, >> given what was just said, this does not speak to that equity because this says artificial surf will be artificial turf will be installed on stadium fields wherever possible, which will continue what you've just talked about. Should it be the expectation? Again, I'm just >> right. But this says wherever possible. If all of them are done, should we be striking wherever possible? Is it our basic expectation? Then

119if it is, we need to strike that. >> I'll just say that goes to there is a debate about that I think from from what I understand from facilities. But do you want to speak in 729? So just check it in. Maybe we can go a few more minutes if you want to try and nip this. But >> types of I think they're trying to be economical in their verbiage because there are lots of types of athletic fields. It's not just football fields, right? So >> um >> uh >> it says stadium fields. So those would not be, you know, your regular playground fields. Stadium fields would be to me speaking where you're playing your football, your soccer, lacrosse. >> That's where it's played. It's played on the football fields on that. >> But there's

120Yeah. >> Um Gordon, what does stadium field mean to you? I would look at it and to include all fields. I would practice fields as well. I mean, it says stadium. If you want to be prescriptive and say stadium, fine. I I I would look at it from a aspect of uh practice, but we're not we don't have uh artificial turf on all of our practice fields as well. Right. So, >> I I just would like to offer this is one of those examples I think Mr. Fish you pointed out. said this was last reviewed in 2013, which was also when the turf allocation agreement was last reviewed that is starting to be under review now. So again, I do wonder just given the hour, should we just put this aside for now >> and

121come back? I know we're still >> I have one suggestion that might fix it. Um because we're being more prescriptive with the word stadium, I think we get max flexibility by taking out the word stadium because now it's then saying all fields wherever possible. Um and that could include stadiums. It could also include there are other facilities that have turf fields that are not part of the stadium. >> But that doesn't resolve resolve the issue. The issue is are we going to put um artificial turf in some places and not in others? >> But we have policies that do address that. we have an overreaching equity policy. >> So it's not wherever possible. It's that is our expectation. I think where I would like to have the delineation is that it's on the main fields

122and not necessarily in the practice fields. And I don't even know if that matters because the reason why we're doing this is for a um a health issue. And yes, I know we've said before grass is best, but some of these are really good. I I I don't know if that resolves the the question that I have because what I don't want it to be is wherever possible and it's possible in these places and not possible in these places meaning not types of field but where the schools are located. >> Well, that's what I'm getting is we have an equity policy that would say that that is in violation. A choice made like that would not be in in alignment with our equity policy. >> So then do we need the language that says >>

123I think you do because of two reasons. one some sports you wouldn't do this to and number two there might be a physical limitation. For example, when we talk about net zero schools, not every school can be truly net zero because it might not be able to have a thermal well or some other kind of physical limitation. So they have to have some flexibility. What we're basically saying here is when possible do this. So, what what do we Let's see. We're one away. Do we want to modify the um remove the word stadium? Again, we can work on this and bring the change to the board, right? We're so close. So, I'm going to go for it. Let's >> Can I make a motion to to strike the word stadium and adopt the motion? Uh

124>> I'll second that motion. I So it's it's not rushed. We've been trying to do this for two years. We I mean we and and the CIP is coming up. So this is such a great time to be rethinking this over. So um so Mr. Fr has moved that um that the word stadium be struck from whatever section that is, >> right? and that the board committee send policy um 8310 site planning and development as revised to the full board for adoption. So let's make sure that that motion is accurate. Right. But this one we Mr. Fish made one more motion to remove the word stadium which is not part of the So do we want to agree? Is there objection to removing stadium without objection Dr. Anderson? Do you object to that to removing

125the word stadium? >> Um, I don't have any objections to that. >> Okay. So, without objection, we will remove the word stadium. >> You don't need to put in the motion. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Yes. >> I don't know. Um, okay. Motion. Did you make the motion? Mr. Fresh made it. And who seconded it? I did. Uh, the governance committee the governance committee sends policy 8310 site planning and development as revised to the full board for adoption. Moved by Mr. FR seconded by me. No comments. All those in favor? Mr. Fr, myself, Miss Lady, Miss St. John Cunning. Those opposed? Dr. Anderson. So it moves forward to the board for one. And with that, >> Miss Marin, really quickly, I just want to note based on what you're saying with the CIPs, it sounds like

126for the CIP policies, we should reserve since the CIP, I believe, is on action for 212. So for the CIP policies, it seems like we should put those on action for or consent for 212 since that would be all of the conversation. Or do you still want it all on 122 based on the comments I'm hearing? We just want clarity. That is one clarity question. >> I think the governance chair should work with the chair and vice chair to schedule appropriately. It gives you time to actually think it through. My choice would be before we do CIP so that it's hammered out and done before we actually engage in the actual vote. Having these if there is going to be debate on the same night as CIP is only asking for a late meeting. >>

127Yeah, I I see both sides, but it's going to come down to I think a practicality thing too. Okay. So, I will work with our chair and vice chair to schedule. Um just real quick for our next governance committee meeting, we've heard a lot from our public about the calendar being problematic. um or just wondering how they can provide input and the board also has talked about it. So, I'm sorry. Um so, we were going to talk about that. Um that was something we could um talk about and also AI. The superintendent um has an AI policy uh that she would like to bring in draft very timely. And then the third thing um gosh, I can't remember now. There was a third thing. >> Um, just one second. We're meeting again on January 20th,

128so very full. >> Thank you everybody for agreeing to move the timing of these meetings, by the way. >> Yes. And um Oh, and we had a policy from October 14th. It was um agenda item 3.056860 about broadcasting curricular and extracurricular events. So that would bring us like up to speed with everything we've discussed so far. And then we could go back to that list. we looked at I think in June when Miss Lady was chair of the committee and then get the next slew of things. Okay. So, we'll confirm the agenda. Please continue to give input, but we'll turn that around. So, governance. >> All right. We are journed at 7:37 p.m. Thank you. >> All right.