001started at six as well. Okay. All right, the time is 6:17 p.m. in this December 11th, 2025 comprehensive plan development committee meeting, Fairfax County School Board will now come to order. Um, apologies for the late start. Uh, traffic and and it um so we have a couple of items to go through. First is administrative, which is the minutes of the October 30th, 2025 CPDC meeting are before the committee for approval. Those are posted online and I'll open the floor for a motion. Uh and then we'll have a discussion on that. Is there a motion for the minutes? Yeah, the minutes are posted online. Yeah. That's fine. We can we'll put a pin in the minutes. Why don't we take five minutes to go through the minutes? Does that work for you? Do you have internet
002access? >> Okay. I don't think so. It's on board docs. I think they're online. I don't know my board docs and nothing is working on my end. So we can put those up. The work session or the meeting. So we're doing in part of the CIP work session, we're going to fold in a conversation of EDS specs. I think you brought that up at the dis. So we're so basically we teed it up with the CPDC meeting and then at the work session coming up with CIP. There's going to be a bit on on EDS specs in there as well. Instead of a community advisory committee, you want to say a schoolboard advisory committee. That's fine. If there no objection, that's fine. It's working for me now. I don't know. So, Miss Mayor, the background
003section is what's taken directly from the board docs cover sheet. Um, so this is just laying out the history of the joint facility review committee update and that was taken directly from board docs. Yes. Yes. So the board direction to the clerks on minutes was um at least for this interim period while we're working on the backlog to provide the summary of the meeting. So that the brief summary and so that's why these minutes are a lot more condensed than they have been in the past. Okay. So the minutes above this very clearly state the tenor and the overview of what was discussed. The minutes for this facilities committee do not. The minutes for this facilities for the update that I gave on the joint committees meeting just says that I gave a report. So
004that's not very helpful when we're looking to understand what was said in the future. So >> two reasons for that and we can edit these and come back to them at the next meeting, but the joint facility uh facility committee has their own minutes and so um that's that's one reason. And in board meeting minutes when board members are giving reports we don't actually go into the detail on the report. So for example on the regular meeting minutes for committee reports or liaison reports it just says that that committee chair gave a report on the committee um recent uh activities and work. It doesn't go into the >> Thank you Mr. Jackson. But isn't that because then the committee minutes show what was discussed. I mean there's nowhere now that's discussing what I have brought
005to the board as a joint committee. It's not here and it's not anyway I I don't really I'm began my day at that meeting this morning so I'm a little tired but like this just is not very helpful to say that I spoke about it. >> So do we have the link to the minutes for the full joint facility committee? >> Well I I don't need to see it but I guess my question is could we put in there the link to the minutes of the joint facility committee? Why don't we do that? >> That would be great. >> Yeah. just so that's captured in there. So, at least there's a link over to the full discussion that took place. >> Yeah. And I know Mr. Jackson, you were telling me this morning about whether
006they were available or not. So, if they are, then I'm cool to approve this tonight, but if not, I'd like to wait. >> So, are you okay to approve it if we stick that link in there? I am. >> Okay. All right. That's Thank you. And then that technical adjustment. So, okay. >> Um, so we'll make those two adjustments and then we can >> come back at the end. Not a big deal. >> Um, okay. So, we'll defer the vote on that until the technical adjustments are made. Um going back here on so the next order of business is agenda item three logistics integration of community members of the facility planning advisory council's work into the comprehensive plan development committee. So to set this up there's a document um on board docs. There's basically two
007key decisions that I I would prefer to have a decision point on tonight. If not we'll have another meeting I think in February where we could finalize it. Um so the because of the changes that the board approved for FPAC and CPDC structure at the meeting last week um Mr. Dunn brought an amendment that the board approved where we went from uh two key amendments. Number one, we went from we added the or related to the criteria section of community members. Um the second amendment was going from three community members to five community members. So, because we've increased it from three to five community members, u Miss Seismore Heiser brought a an amendment to an amendment um that requires us to come up with a way to weight the votes so that the community member
008votes do not outweigh board member votes. Um so, the first discussion point is is um the waiting of those votes. Now, I did talk to the clerk and Kevin, you know how board docs works much better than I do, but in talking with the clerks, the recommendation was instead of like a 0.5 vote or a 0.25 vote or a fraction of a vote, everybody on the CPDC to include the community members, the board members, and the city representative get one vote with board members getting an additional one vote a piece. Um, and the recommendation, my understanding is that that recommendation was because of how board docs is set up and the counting of votes in board docs. Kevin, do you have anything you want to add to that? >> No, that's correct. And so with
009board docs, we cannot really wait votes. And so this is our way of basically addressing that and we would basically create an additional uh schoolboard member CPDC vote. And then that way uh when I load the votes um in for each motion then they would actually show uh reflecting that waiting and everything would work seamlessly without us building some external platform to um uh to um uh calculate the votes. >> Okay. Uh Mr. Dunn, >> thank you. Um, one of my motions at the um DEIS on Thursday was to obtain a um legal opinion on the roles, responsibilities, and restrictions on community members serving as a member of CPDC. Um, I would like to request that next time we have a CPDC meeting that we have a close session to be able to discuss that
010opinion as a committee. Um secondly, um I'd like to suggest that we and I'm happy to make a motion this regard. Um given the novelty of um waiting of votes, um I would like to suggest that uh we obtain a legal opinion or perhaps parliamentary guidance from our parliamentarian Jason Morgan on on precedent for for waiting of votes. Not saying I oppose it. I just um what I don't want to have happen is we do take some action now or 10 years in the future and uh and it could be about you know the renovation queue or whatever the subject matter is and then there's a lawsuit and they find that we have broken some law broken some parliamentary procedure. We've seen this in Lowden County. We've seen it uh with um you know various
011um you know the missing middle in Arlington County. Maybe you've seen it with data center proceedings with the um just lot lots of stuff that you're probably familiar with, Mr. McDaniel, um from your work on the county. Um and uh and I just don't want to have the uh FCPS be vulnerable to a legal challenge. Um so getting authoritative definitive legal guidance uh in advance of making any decisions as a committee on how we should wait, how we should do it for the convenience of board docks, I think would be um be prudent. Miss Baron, >> I appreciate the innovative approach to trying to make this work, but I do not support creating a new mode of voting. I agree with my colleague um that we really need to be cautious and I think it
012could be really ju just a timeconsuming thing to ask legal to go and do this. I I think we need a little more time. I'm aware there were some people who couldn't make it tonight. Even though this was a scheduled meeting, just given the discussion at last Thursday's regular session, I think there are some more people who would like to be here. I've been out of town. I'd like to digest this a bit more. So, I would like to just wait. I don't yet want to ask council to proceed with this. I'd like to have a bigger discussion, but um on the face of it, I am not interested in creating a new creating a precedent for a new way of doing business just on the fly because of this. >> Mr. D, >> sorry,
013just while I can say something, I I was there not a joint facilities meeting today? So, I I just didn't see on the agenda that there was going to be a briefing on that. So, I just wanted to see if it might be possible for uh one of the attendees. >> Yeah, there was. And we we can have that conversation. That's not a big deal. >> Um, so legal did send a memo around and want to be careful what I say, but that was addressed in the memo, the questions that you're raising. So, um, there's no particular, as I said in my opening comments, there's no particular pressing need to make a decision tonight. We just need to figure out either a path forward or a decision. So, there's no problem on my end of
014scheduling a close session to make sure that we're good with that. Um the board did bind the structure for the the requirement to have community members not be outweighed by or excuse me community member votes to be outweighed by board member votes. So with that as kind of the baseline for the discussion, we can certainly have a conversation for close session. I think we have a February meeting. I can't January fee, maybe both, but we can certainly have a close session to talk about that. >> We have a meeting in both January and February. >> Okay, there you go. January. So after the first of the year, we can have council come and cover that memo. But that memo was sent around. I don't know if you guys saw it or not. >> I think
015that was just today. Uh >> it was either yesterday or this morning. >> Yeah. >> Uh what what are the dates in January and February, Kevin? >> The January meeting is January 15th and the February meeting is February 19th, but that's going to be right before the PM work session on the budget. >> Okay, that's right. Yeah, we scheduled an earlier meeting on that day because of the budget work session. Um, Miss Mar. >> Um, well, granted, I was not here on the Thursday regular meeting. I don't think that I I think the information that whatever is in this legal memo that was just sent would have been good for the board to have for that decision. So, I just feel like there's a lot of cart before the horse here and um I definitely
016need more than a few hours to know that something's in my inbox. So, I would just like to table it completely. We can talk about it next time, but I I don't want to put any action forward. We have a lot of priorities, including the CIP before we meet again. So, um I really would like the staff to focus on that and not this particular thing. That's my feeling. >> That's fine. We can do the closed session conversation to go over the memo in January. >> And I guess I obviously if there's a memo from legal, there's something that's closed, but I don't know why it needs to be a closed conversation to talk about the makeup of a committee that was already talked about in public. I mean, there's legal I'll work with council
017and I'll work with um the clerks to make sure what we can be very clear on what we can and can't discuss and open versus closed. >> That'd be great. >> So, I I'm not making any >> I don't know. So, I don't want to I don't want to say one thing and it turns out to be something else. Mr. Dunn. >> Okay. >> Um c can you please make sure that uh or can you please invite John Foster andor I don't know if Sona Rari participate in the memo at all, but whoever are the authors of the memo are there and prepared to speak. uh to it. I just want to make sure we're not talking just amongst us since legal is not a regular attendee at CBDC meetings. >> That's fine. Yeah. >>
018So the next discussion point um which similar logistical issue when we went from three to five members um the original document had a phasein schedule of the three members and that was based on the audit committee original phasein schedule of two members. So, the original document phased in one member on a one-year term, the second member on a two-year term, the third member on a three-year term, but now they're going to three to five members. We need to figure out a way to phase in those additional two members. Um, you know, the recommendation here is just something that I came up with with the clerks. I have no pride of authorship. If the committee wants to do something different, it's really immaterial in my mind, but we do need to figure out and perhaps it
019could be a part of the conversation. Yeah, that draft that document that I sent you earlier, Kevin. It's right It's right there under under that second discussion point where it says 212213. So effectively, we would take the additional two members and one would get a one-year term, the second would get a two-year term, and then the that fifth person would get the three-year term, and then at the end of each of those respective terms, it would start the three-year cycle. And the point of that was to try to not have everybody rolling off at the same time as well. So if does that make let me ask, does that make sense from the timing perspective? Not saying that's what we have to go with, but just >> be recognized. >> No, no, go ahead, please.
020Um, can you uh clarify the second bullet under changes approved where it says changing criteria dash or related? I don't know what that means. >> Yeah. So, your amendment it took the original criteria and added the comma or related to it. >> I think it had more than that. It had >> Oh, was it more than okay? Okay. Whatever your your approved criteria is. I thought it was just the or related, but whatever that is, that's going to be the change. So, we can update the document to reflect that. >> Yeah. there were more subject matters that were explicitly called out, >> right? Um uh c can I ask uh is it necessary is is is uh is the audit committee I never served on the audit committee so I don't know is are are
021the two people who serve on the audit committee are they staggered >> they were staggered >> originally they were originally they were staggered >> and then they started the they started the rolling end of the cycle and again that language came right from the governance manual appendix I want to say appendix L which was the audit committee application process. >> Is it not just possible to do one-year terms that are renewable? I mean, we can just keep renewing at an item >> under the approved changes. It's a three-year term instead of one-year term, but in terms of the actual roll in of those members, we can do, you know, we can figure out how we want to do that because we did approve technical adjustments. We gave the clerks the latitude to make technical adjustments
022and I would I would consider this a technical adjustment to comply with the addition of two extra members. However we want to phase people in, whatever works best. Um, I mean, whatever the committee wants to do, I'm I'm totally fine with >> understanding that uh we approved uh three-year terms, but we could uh is there is there a benefit uh that wasn't something that was discussed at the DEA? So, do you feel strongly about that three-year term versus renewable one-year terms just to match, you know, what other people do? Although how what was the term of service of the citizen members on the audit committee? Is that >> I believe there are three years. >> There's three years. >> Three years as well. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Miss M. >> So I'm realizing that
023when we thoughtfully updated the advisory committee, you know, guide book and advisory committee protocols, that was the function of the public engagement committee of the board. And they have not been part of this. And you know, I do think it's unfortunate that this all went through on Thursday without key information like the number of committee members and how they're going to vote, but it's the public engagement committee that's really supposed to be talking about terms. And again, I just think this needs a bit more work uh to be uh consistent with how we've approached other committees. So, I don't know why we would want to have this one be different for any other reason. I think it needs to be something that gets worked on with public engagement. That's what we do with the rest
024of the committees. >> Gotcha. Well, so the board's proved the structure with the two changes. So we have a charge from the board as well to come back with a way to integrate the two changes that the board approved. Um so if we want to ask someone from PE to have a hand in that, I suppose we could. Although Pek isn't necessarily the keeper of the advisory committees. Um but you know again if we're going to have a conversation in close session about item number one the discussion point of waiting of the community member votes um we can chew on this for a few weeks and come back with a way to figure out how to roll in these additional two members because it doesn't have an effective start date till April 1st 2026. So,
025we do have some time on that >> and and I guess >> there's Go ahead. >> There there is another suggestion that's coming to me as I'm sitting here. Um, you could also do adjust this slightly to do um three people on a one-year term and then two people on the the two-year term. And then that way it allows the board to appoint two sets per term. Um and because right now if you do the three-year cycle then you would only appoint one full set every term. That gives you more flexibility for your consideration. That makes sense. Okay. So what I the name plaques are still up. Do we know what turns? Okay. So, what I'm hearing is now that we've had this conversation, we will have another agenda item for the January meeting where
026we can flush this out a little bit more and we can think about it for the next few weeks >> and we'll be able to do the close session in January. >> Well, yeah, if if we need it to be closed session. If we don't need to be closed session, then there's there would be no point. But I I would suspect it probably would be a close session. >> I think it also depends. Sorry. >> No, that's fine. I'll follow up with staff to see if if it's closed versus open. I think it also depends on what else the chair and vice chair already have on the docket for closed meetings. You know, there's a method to scheduling closed meetings. So >> to to be clear, I was referring to just a closed meeting of
027this committee, not the full board. That was your was that Mr. Dunn, was that your suggestion >> to to have the closed session in January? >> Well, a closed session of the committee. >> Yes. >> Not the full board. Okay. I want to make sure Yeah. Okay. I want to make sure I understood that. like audits sometimes have closed sessions. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I think it has to be really clear like Mr. Jackson just made a recommendation like can those be fleshed out? I I still don't understand why we can't just start everyone at the same time in April. Why? Why are we dovetailing them in or scaffolding them in? >> It was to have staggered terms. That was the point of the stagger. >> But didn't we just say that audit doesn't do
028that? >> The audit member uh community members are still staggered. And then so the April one cut ending date. So whoever is currently on Oh, it's no one because it's us. So >> Okay. Thanks. >> Okay. All right. Um and then the next item on this list is discussion of FPAC work and CPDC work for the year. So at the board meeting last week, I did uh make comments that we would bring in anybody from FPAC that that chose to attend to talk about the items that they're working. I know we have staff here as well. talk about the items that they're working on and how do we integrate that into uh the work schedule for CPDC um and ideas to tackle some of that work starting April 1st, 2026 as the committee structure changes
029over. Um so we have who do we have from FP? >> Pria Swami >> Pria and I see Brian up there as well. >> And can I ask the hard copy agendas that we received are different from the agenda that's on the screen? >> It technically isn't supposed to be called an agenda. That was just details on the discussion points that we were going to have. But I point taken >> just for the consistency of >> No, I got you. Yeah. So, the board doc um this document is the basically the background document for item 1.03. Should not have been called an agenda, but I I got you there. Um so, discussion of FPAC work and CBDC for the year. Um I will open the floor to have a conversation. I know Pria and Brian,
030you guys are on Zoom. Feel free to jump in here, raise your hand, and Kevin will um make sure that you guys can can speak. We'll do a quick mic check. Um and then I maybe I'll turn things over to I know Brian, you're you're kind of newish here. Um so any input that you want to have on the work that FPAC has been doing and how we can best integrate that, you're certainly welcome to jump in here. Um, but Priya or Brian, do you guys have any input on what items that you're working on that you would like to see CPDC take up? >> Brian, sorry. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. >> Sorry. I I just I'm I'm more listening today just because I with the short notice of the meeting,
031I I couldn't find the job here. So, I'm I'm watching two little ones at the same time. So, um we're just kind of more listening participating tonight. >> No worries. Thank you. >> Yeah. And hi everyone. This is probably my personal capacity here today. I'm not representing you know the viewers of the box. Um so again similar to I'm here to listen and kind of understand how um how um these changes will be affecting some of the uh the work that FP pack has done. So here to learn Okay, thank you. Um, Mr. Don, >> um, if if I may suggest based on work done by FPAC over the past two years and discussions uh, held this year. Um, one topic that I think it would be worth discussing uh is energy management and in
032particular virtual power plants which I believe is a topic Misswami brought to FPAC. Um uh a similar and related topic is the use of escos and uh similar uh arrangements to uh maximize energy savings um and perhaps getting some kind of report um from facilities on are we currently using escos and similar arrangements and are we headed in a direction to use them more uh especially to um upgrade some of our HVAC systems or other other um uh energy intensive systems in our building. I think what we saw at Hayfield Secondary School is a dire need to upgrade our HVAC generally. And I was surprised coming out of the pandemic with all the pandemic dollars that we didn't come out with brand new spanking HVAC everywhere. But um maybe those dollars went other other places.
033Um but I think I know we will get data through the facilities condition assessment but um having some understanding of how we can use third parties um and their financing without spending additional dollars on our part to actually get better HVAC systems or similar energy intent systems and still perhaps saving money I think would be useful to know especially at a time if anyone's tracking um uh utility regul ation matters in Virginia as I am um for my consulting business ver uh the Virginia Corporation Commission just authorized virtual power plants to be established in Virginia. So I think it's a very opportune time. Um, in addition to that, there was a lot of work that FPAC did on uh private public partnerships, bringing in uh Gil Bane and other people to do presentations um within
034the last two years, uh writing a couple memos, doing uh reactions to the P3 report we've received last year. And I think um there's there's more work that could be done to lay the foundation uh perhaps for exploring that um down the road uh by FCPS. >> Thank you. And for staff, could we get actually get a copy of all the memos that FPAC has sent directly to you because some board members have not seen them. Can we get a copy of those memos? We can find those for you. >> So, let's recirculate that to make sure that we're not missing anything that um you know, we don't need to be missing. >> Sure. Shouldn't be a problem. >> Okay. >> I can also communicate to Katie Herman. She has all those memos. >> Yeah.
035Whoever has the memos, let's just get a copy of all those memos that have been sent around. I don't want to miss any of the work that's been done or have any balls be dropped >> for for what period of time? >> I two years. Yeah. Two years. I mean, since the term started, I think that's probably reasonable. >> Do you want those directed to this committee? >> Yeah, just send the whole committee. That's fine. Yeah, that works. And then I think you know I had I did have an idea and I kind of you know I think we should kind of chew on this of how best for CPDC to tackle some of this work that's been done because we do not meet as regularly as FPAC meeting as FPAC met. Um there's some
036interesting language in the governance manual about the ability for committees to set up working groups. So, one of the thoughts that I was having and kind of chewing over in my mind is the ability to set up working groups that specifically work on some of these topics that we're discussing here. And I think the memos that have been generated could inform the topics that we would then decide to pick up and potentially small working groups can be kind of tasked out with doing some of that work without requiring full committee meetings. Um, but you know, that's we can flesh that a little bit more in January if we need to. Oh, yes. Fine. Did you hear Did you hear that? I thought Oh, sorry. I thought I thought you might be interested. What I was
037saying is um the governance manual does allow for committees to set up um working groups or yes, working groups of small subgroups of the full committee. So since we're expanding the committee from five members to 10 members, I think that would be a good opportunity to set up working groups with some of the topics that we identify that the FPACT has been working on. That way we don't get bogged down in having to have the work directed through full meetings of CPDC. So, one idea that I did have is if there's a member of CPDC that has a particular interest in a topic area, you know, that like virtual power plants for example, you could be able to work as a subgroup, a working group directly with some of the community members to flesh that
038out more. Um, because we do meet less than FPACNET. Um, and we don't really have like work session time, so to speak, to do some of that heavy lifting they've been doing. Um, but that was an idea that that that came to mind. Miss, go ahead. >> That's great. Thank you. I I I wasn't aware of that. So that would that's that would be very helpful and useful to be able to report back to CPDC. >> Miss Mirror. >> Yeah, just thinking about the meeting we had this morning u myself and Mr. McDaniel for the joint facility committee with the board of supervisors and I'm happy to go into a summary of that but you know it's become clear to me as just one board member that there's a lot that we could learn about
039facilities. today it was about the 2232 process and even though we have had conversations about it there's a lot more to it um I think the same could be said of what was in the last which the first joint committee meeting there's a lot of background about how um the funds what funds fund facilities so I don't I I think we should deliberate about what kind of work topics we want to work on because there's things that are really you know connected to and things that are more, you know, I don't know about the data centers and you know that did that come up today? No, that was a different meeting. Um, but there are things that we really need to dig deeper on and like how do we transfer that knowledge to the other
040decision makers that were on the boards with you know even edspecs like that could be I think something that is more pertinent than talking about you know data centers that we have zero control over. So I I think I'd like to establish some parameters on what we work on as being things that we can actually influence and maybe like legislative advocacy or somewhere else, you know, let's weave that in. So um yeah, when we do discuss that, I I would like to keep that in mind. Thanks, >> Mr. Dunn. >> Uh I I fully agree. I just wanted to mention since uh and I didn't mean data centers. I'm sorry if I misspoke at all. I was talking about virtual power plants which is just using um like batteries and such for you know energy
041storage and distributed uh energy management. Um uh I did want to mention about the 2232 process since you touched on that that um Miss Seismore Heiser and I uh attended a meeting last year with the planning commission which was focused on the 2232 process and I know the staff for facilities and the staff for the planning commission are continuing to have some dialogue about um creating different buckets. um one bucket for major renovations and then a separate bucket for maybe lighter touch projects so that you have different levels of community engagement depending on the scope of the project. Um that was kind of the rough informal agreement we reached although obviously consultation with the board but it might be beneficial for uh my colleagues Miss Mayor and Miss McDaniel to also be designated by the
042chair of the school board to be the people who also engage in those discussions with the planning commission. So then you maintain unity of conversations um rather than having different parts of the board having separate dialogues about basically the same or related subject matter. >> That is an excellent dovetail into what I was just going to ask Miss Merritt to do. Would you like to give an update from this morning's joint facility? >> I would. I would. But I really appreciate that um that uh idea Mr. Dunn because also I believe Miss Seismarheiser is the planning commission contact and as we know she won her election. So after Tuesday that will be vacant. So um that that's a great idea. Yeah. So 2232. So absolutely Mr. done. You mentioned so it was like February and
043really what we did at the meeting today was hear from the county about what the 2232 process is and just kind of all get a level setting and the link is posted on their committee website and I am getting the you know the links all together and I'm happy to share but you know the the history seems to be that like in 2014 the county really looked at the the code 2232 and there were three um actually I just saved it to my desktop up if I could just pull it up right here because it was interesting. So the 2232 by state code has requirements that a public engagement process be had when it's uh referring to location, the extent and the character. So in 2012 it was kind of agreed upon that the bond
044process did due diligence about location, right? Because people are voting on the bond. there's clearly engagement. But in 2022, the planning commission expressed interest understanding, but I believe it's generally right, but so not verbatim, but in 2022, the planning commission uh wanted to have a more formal process because there seemed to be times when the school's projects were coming to the planning commission and the project information might have been incomplete or changed and they just wanted to really be sure that the community engagement piece was happening. So that's what changed in 2022. And then earlier this year or was it even last year might even 24 that uh the schools and the planning commission part of the education part of the planning commission went over that the way that it's being implemented now with 2232
045is taking a really long time and so that brought us to the topic being on this joint committee today which is what's going on what has happened how can we make things better and as part of the presentation and I I'll I'll pull it up to share just among us they did outline four projects that the schools had gone through the 2232 and showed that it was above 60 days which is the minimum that is required for public engagement um before it goes forward but the the body can ask for more and so indeed it was more than 60 and um it showed it was under one year. So, so we the next step is to have the staff are going to work more on it and really see if we could get to clarity
046on how to bring things to uh the planning commission that satisfy the 2232 that are more complete. So, there's not as much back and forth and using of time. So, that is the next step. I don't expect that it will be updated by the January committee meeting, the first one or the second, but that is what came out of that. and then I'll pause there because the next um subject was about so but I'll pause there. >> Thank you Mr. Don. >> Um I just wanted to highlight I I believe um that narrative is missing a very important chunk of information and this is not from my personal involvement but I can just tell you I've had dozens of hours of conversation about this and read a lot of stuff. So, this committee, CPDC, um
047I believe under the leadership of former school board member Karen Kiskamara when she was chair of CPDC devoted uh a year or two years of work and I don't know if Miss Miss Pitches was on it at that time to developing an entirely new approach to community engagement um uh basically in solely intended or primarily intended to address the planning commission's concerns about 2232. Now, even though that was done at very laborious timeintensive work and it was successfully implemented, I believe it's at least partially reflected on the uh facilities website. Um, in the conversation that Miss Seismore Heiser and I had with the planning commission last year, um, there was concerns expressed that it did not meet the planning commission's expectations and former planning commission member uh, Miss Stranley um, had extensive thoughts on that
048and shared at that time different documents by email and otherwise. So, just be aware that there is that piece out there that you might need to consider and and wade through um all of the documents. Um >> yes, thank you. And I did want to say that I did request that our staff send to the county a link to the communications process that we have. And I did I will resend it around. My email is super slow, but um I'm not sure if the county received that. So, but you're right. So, there's some disconnects here. It seems like ensuring that whatever we put forward is as complete as possible is really the lynch pin. Um that that seemed to rise to the top of the conversation. >> There was also some concern about the fact
049that there was perceived to be and and and maybe Mr. Davis knows this. Uh anou that was uh not entirely lawful and FCPS was using that and the planning commission disagreed and when they discovered that. So that that's a whole thing as well. And again, I'm referring to things that preceded my time and uh I'm sure there are people who can discuss this at greater length, but just these are things that need to be resolved within 2232. It's definitely not a neat little package. It's got a lot of um hot messes in there. >> Yeah, I agree. And I think the key takeaway from the 2232 conversation, at least in my mind this morning, was discretion. There is the state code is very broad in terms of what it allows localities to do when they
050interpret and implement the 2232 process. Um, so we just have to have a conversation with with the county side and the planning commission to make sure that we're getting back to um something that everybody can be on the same page with. >> And that's a good segue to theou. But before I talk about that, I wanted to share that I had asked and in hearing that the um Mr. I'm happy to wait. I don't want you to Are you okay? Okay. Um, in an effort to be more clear about the expectations and not rely on, you know, agreements or assumptions, you know, I said, does the board of supervisors and the county have policy or regulation or something that we could really, you know, code in so that we all know? And the response was,
051well, we want to keep our flexibility, which is fine, but not to the point where it creates a lack of things being done on time and and included. So there was this kind of conversation about let's be flexible but we also need to know what we're doing. So, um, so going into theou, we I know our staff has started compiling for all sorts of different facilities and, um, really they're the ones I've seen have pretty much all been out of date and I shared an example of four different high schools, um, around my district that all had differentus ranging from 2003 or 7 to 2014. And so the commitment there from the county was and the and our staff was to gather existingus to see what was out there. Although I said, well, if they're
052all expired, I'm not sure, you know, we could just start new with a new template. But really, the point that I made is that our community use policy needs to be updated with what we need it to have. And I know it was updated maybe two years ago, but there's stuff in it that needs it needs more clarity based on what I am thinking from this joint committee meeting as well as um my participation as our liaison to the Fairfax County um uh athletic council Fairfax County athletic council because there is a lot of wasted time and money and a lot of frustration at the joint facility use I think because theseus are out of date and there aren't agreements written down that are updated. So, I do see it as part of the joint
053committee plan because we're trying to save resources and until we get our policy with what we need to deliver our mission and what the community needs ironed out, then theou comes from there. So, >> I agree. Yeah, >> it's a big bowl of yarn and >> and there are things on the table like the turf allocation and I said well allocation and use and maintenance are all tied together and if we just have a turf allocation policy which is I think what exists from 2011 and then we have a maintenance like it's got to all come together because otherwise we remain in this position of maintaining a um facilities for the entire community and then we're using our instructional dollars now more and more to do that and that is lessening our ability to meet
054our mission. So that's that's my lens is I want to get us out of the business of maintaining facilities for the entire community's use. I want it to be a fair share. So >> I'm sorry. Can you clarify these are these with thirdparty organizations like soccer clubs and other organizations? >> Some are it varies. There is no template. So it could be a high school uh the school board and the board of supervisors. It could be a boosters club, a high school, a private or nonprofit soccer, you know, sports league and the park authority. There's many iterations and not a format. And so, >> and they're and they're not limited to just athletic. I mean, athletic that was one example. So, like for example, our sacou for the sack classroom spaces, that's a big one.
055Um, you can even go >> 1988, correct? You could even go into, you know, shared parking lots, things like that. So, it's I mean dozens ofUS across a whole bunch of different topics. >> Well, and even theus with the parking lots, that's a good point, Mr. McDaniel, because facilities like we recently, our board signed a lease for tens of thousands of dollars to lease space for our school buses to park. Now, what if there's a library parking lot or, you know, something that's undeveloped? we could park it there seemingly for free or at least for cost to the county rather than paying a private provider to lease that space. So that's part of the shared or joint use or collocation that's going to come up on the agenda I believe at the second January meeting.
056But there's noou for that kind of thing you see or no standard way to even approach it. And at at a minimum we should know what our legal obligations are if they are legal because generally are not legally binding. But we should know what our promises are, informal or or otherwise, and be able to categorize those and have those in a spreadsheet, a database or something else, and update them. And but I'd also say sunset them because there might be some organizations that have gone out of business or, you know, some sports that are no longer being practiced. And um you know, I I do know that, you know, the use of our fields are increasingly encumbered by outside organizations. I have a middle school where um recently put in a cricket field, right? Well,
057there's not a cricket team at the middle school and so that is an investment I believe $100,000 or in that neighborhood of of dollars. Now, if the middle school decides it wants to use that field for something else, then we might be creating a legal liability. So, there might be not just legal agreements but legal risks associated with this. Um, but there's also a question, um, that I think from a strategic level, if you take a step back, does FCPS want to own athletic fields, right? Like if they're being used by, you know, outside organizations, perhaps FCPS could make a decision at some point, well, we just want to hand over those to the park authority to manage or the county to manage as a common resource. We'll use them sometimes, they'll use them sometimes,
058and then they're off our books. We don't have to pay for them anymore. Just kind of like outsourcing responsibility. not advocating for that, but we do need to be thinking broader because I do appreciate Miss Maron's point. If we're spending budget dollars that are for the public, that's not our mission. Our mission is the students, right? >> Yeah. Exactly. Um and this is why I I asked at the outset that the park authority be at the table because when all three of us are at the table, that's when we start to see these things. And um Exactly. I mean, I asked today too, are MAUs legally binding? Do we want a contract? Like, that's we need to figure that stuff out and write it down. Um, because, you know, the example I gave was my
059doc my daughter's in South Lakes varsity soccer and the last time the turf allocation policy was reviewed was when she was one year old and we're having all these problems and I don't want to leave these problems for the next future boards. Our, you know, we try to do our policies every five years. Maybe that's the thing. And I do, I do hear from the county athletic council, Mr. done that. Indeed, there are more private um recreational groups coming in. And again, what is our mission? It's to educate kids. It's to provide our residents use. And then so that's why that community use policy update is so important because we can articulate that that as a school board, that's the hierarchy. And when we run out of space and money, well, that's just it. I've
060also learned that no other county around us has any kind of community use like we do. loud in Prince William, whether it's because they have parks and recck space or what, but nobody does what we do. And I think that what I'm seeing is there's a lot of miscommunication and dispersed work. And I really think we got to figure out how to get out of the business of managing the community's use of our schools because that's not our job. So, >> and do we even get those community use dollars? Do those come back to us? >> I don't think so. And that's something that could also be stipulated or we recognize like what's inind, right? If we if we park school buses at a library, well, that could be inind and it needs something more
061sophisticated and succinct than what we're doing. Now, it's a great question. >> It depends on who you ask. Um, we we get a portion of community use dollars. Um, I think we I and there's a budget question out there. There's a response from the budget department. I have to go back and dig up, but it's a very small portion of the community use dollars that's collected. Like I think it's a few hundred thousand dollars. It's not it's not all that much. >> Do you know what the total revenue for conveniences? >> I do not off the top of my head. >> I mean, >> I I don't want to say one way or the other. It's the the split of the community use fees is kind of a it's a little convoluted. Um, so basically
062the county collects the fees and then gives us our share of the fees. Um, and you know, yeah, I mean I I guess I've always struggled with community. I've never dived into it, but why if it's our buildings, right? It's clearly our buildings and we're letting them be used. Um, I mean, if if there's a third party who uses the Fairfax County Government Center, do we we don't get a cut of that and we're not the reservation agent for that, so why would the county be the reservation agent for for community use? If it's our building our land and and they are budget constrained, this seems like the opportunity to I mean, we could just contract out to a third party, not the county, to manage this on behalf and make it more profit centric,
063right? I don't disagree with you. So, it's it's And I know Melanie, you've been really on top of the community use side of the house because you've done a lot of research. >> Yeah. I think >> and if I'm saying anything that's not accurate, correct me, please. >> No, I agree with you. I mean, I think that's the question like that would could be something the CBDC works on. You know, something that I've been trying to do through this work and with um the athletic council is find that kind of information to understand and to in some ways to lessen like well this is the school's property and the county's property and the park's property in some ways but then when it comes to well we're paying the bill like a great example is the
064stadium bathrooms right so the stadium bathrooms so 15 high schools did not have bathrooms including South Lakes portaotties so we the previous board authorized having them installed took three I don't know if it's 2232 took a lot of permitting and they got installed prior to this school year. So then community use is like great so how do we get the keys? But the thing is we staff them, we clean them, we secure them, we light them, we pay for the water. And so I brought this to the athletic council um earlier this year and I explained that and other sports um some teams were like, "Well, yeah, when we have like a tournament, we do pay $1,000 for the weekend to have FCPS provide that service." And so all these years, right, we're we're not
065being paid for that. And that's why we're dipping into instructional dollars. So, I've been really pleased with NCS um has seen that and been like, "Okay, yeah, we do need to have like a legal liability raver and a plan for security and are we going to need cameras and like that's just standard stuff that we don't have." So, I think that's a really good case study and we can use that to say, okay, now how do we expand that to all these other things that we've been footing the bill for and we just can't do anymore? Maybe we could have done it, but we can't because we need that for instruction. I just if we're looking at naming rights or we've had discussions of naming rights other source of revenue and we're limited by law
066in generating fees. So I'm not quite sure if there's a legal reason maybe we need a legal opinion on this if that's some something that would prevent us from managing our own facilities. I don't think we would be procluded from that though. But that just seems like something that we could do to generate money, especially if if we dedicate 100% of community use fees to maintaining our infrastructure because looking at the CIP and perhaps Miss Davis has a comment, our deferred maintenance backlog is we're spending a fraction of what we're supposed to be spending. >> I mean, our our deferred maintenance backlog is was it 300 and some million dollars right now. So, it's incredible. to your point, not only that to maintain them, but there's damage involved that we have to come through and
067take care of the damage sink door, whatever it is. So, there's a lot of fees involved in in just that one. >> Well, thank you. And I know Mr. Muick and Mr. Gordon, their offices have been pulling stuff together like we had that call with the cancellations and really the cancellations are a symptom of the problem, right? So, the county is concerned and we've reduced it way low. When we went over those numbers, most of the can the highest number amount for cancellations were because of maintenance issues. And so if we're looking at this problem of cancellations, well, they're getting canceled because things are broken and not able to be used. And so I think that idea is getting elevated but it's not really coming forward as the thing that we really need to and
068maybe yeah naming rights for more money but at this structure is I think has worn its use out and we need to I'm trying to show data to um support that finding to help it help us move forward. That that's my goal with this but the policy is what is driving this setup. Can I also ask is is your joint facilities board intending to discuss with the county um the they've talked about doing a special bond issuance and please correct me if I'm using the wrong terminology to do like early child care um like expanding sack or do you know what I'm talking about? Um and and my concern is they're doing this. It's, you know, I've talked to superintendent before and she said the county has not approached her to have a conversation and
069it seems our schools are the ideal location if you want to have more daycare, right? Um and uh or expand sack, transform it into something else. Why aren't we involved in that conversation? Because instead of going out and building new buildings, which is costly, it's very expensive to build now, use some of our underutilized um school space across the county. Right. >> I haven't um maybe I haven't I I' I've been I I've heard nebulous kind of discussions about bonding um for that. But I do know that when we started with the joint facilities task force, SAC specifically came up um but the we love our acronyms. SAC is being discussed by skipped. So the skipped committee which I think miss St. John Cunning and I can't remember who else is on that from our
070side. uh but they're kind of taking a focus on the SAC structure uh which is part of that early childhood education um but uh no I haven't um really seen any forward progress to your point >> and and this committee's charge as per the board matter that the supervisors put in place early this year is to not introduce any new ideas for funding it's to reduce it's to find reductions now however our staff has said well we can talk about the split of the bond because we have double the amount at least double the amount of square feet and half the bond comes to us and half the bond goes to the county but our buildings are used more and so that's why that occupancy um use there's like a number of the occupancy rate
071like how many hours a day our buildings are used and it's way up there and it's used by a lot of people that sometimes make a mess right so um and damage things so I also want to elevate that but it's not on the agenda yet so I think before we talk about new money which I don't see an appetite before we could at least talk about the distribution of the bond. Um, and I have all sorts of questions about the bond program, um, how it's done and how it's prioritized. I don't I can't really find the foundational documents of that. So, >> I agree. If they have the opportunity to do a special bond for child care, um, then that raises questions of why don't we have the opportunity to do a special bond
072like a green bond, right? or uh special bond focus on facilities to kind of do a one-time, you know, upgrade of our facilities for maintenance, the infrastructure backlog or to simply cover some of our dire needs, right? Um 41-year renovation backlog is not to anyone's benefit, especially given the ramping community use. We are often the only game in town for most of the facilities across the county. We just don't have, you know, a wide number of community centers geographically dispersed. We have onesies, twoosies here and there. Um and uh and and so we need to take advantage of that and press the county to help us uh if there is flexibility in that bond authority. And we're often told there's not until they decide they do have flexibility. We need to find out what that
073is. And I don't know if that means hiring our own independent uh financial advisory firm that is expert on bonds and such. But we do need to get independent advice and not just rely on the information that we're told, which I feel is perhaps not not wholesome. I mean, I think there's so much work that can be done here. This is why, you know, I continue to say we could spend more time on this. So, today we hosted uh Chairman Jeff McCay at Western High School for a tour. So, myself um so I scheduled the tour and um Sandy Anderson, Ricardi Anderson, and Robin Lady joined. And so that was after the joint committee meeting this morning. So, a lot of the stuff was fresh in my mind. And we were, you know, talking about
074some of these things on the 2232. And you know, I suggested I think we really should be talking about this more often and together. And I don't know that there was much interest in that, but that's why I think the data, the more we can share the data, it will be compelling to to do it. I'm also wondering, Miss Pitches, do you have a different approach in any of this? Do you guys do community use? I'd love to know. Can you share with us? >> Yeah. >> Thank you, Miss P. Chair Pitches. >> Sorry. Um, we have a community use person that we employ. Um, Jazelle Gray. She's housed at Fairfax High School. And the way we do it, so when youth clubs use our fields, they are charged a fee. It's usually per athlete.
075I don't know if the that that charge is different all the time. Um, and the way and we have churches that use Fairfax High School or some of the other buildings. Um, and everything gets scheduled through FCPS or and Gazelle. Yeah. And I believe 15% of the revenue goes to you guys. I don't know who in the county receives it and then 85% remains with um the the city school board and Fairfax High School. So that's how I mean it's a lot easier when you obviously we have four schools. Um, but it we just having that one person sort of take care of it all. And we have a there is a method to the madness. Like we know that we have to pay Fairex County 15% and that is to cover electricity, custodial staff
076to clean up anything. Um, just all the things, all the utilities. >> And we do have Oh, okay. And we do FCPS does have a community use office and they >> use that as well. >> Right. What I'm noticing though is that it's a lot of work. And again, nobody else in the area does this. And I also know that there or I've heard that there are sometimes when school staff will schedule something or they need to rearrange an orchestra concert or a back to school night and like they need to have the priority. And if our policy doesn't say that and if there's an expectation that we're going to there's an expectation now that principles are going to do this stuff and like we just have to remove that because they are focused on
077instruction and even though they're not like directly in the system they're coordinating with NCS and it's it's just created this untenable situation in all sorts of ways. >> In the school services agreement it says that all school in our agreement with you guys all school events come first. So if something gets scheduled through community use and then let's say they decide to have a band concert >> that person gets bumped. So that is thank that's interesting to know and I wonder if that's going to be part of theou pull that you know that agreement pull and that is true but there's instances where maybe something is canceled last minute and it like cancels a whole tournament which we don't want either. We don't want people to you know or there's an expect like so why
078did you have to change it so much or do you need this block? There's just a lot to it that is not codified that again creates frustration and wastes of time and money. So that's really where I'm trying to get everything like and whatever we come to might not please everyone because we have limited space and limited dollars but that's the reality. Yeah. So in the city um the stadium turf and uh Draper Park and Stafford which are the two athletics fields they're across um Fairfax Boulevard from the high school are all maintained by Parks and Rack. Um the school board maintains the other fields that we just turfed like the baseball field and softball field. We maintain um those fields, but um like I said, we and we do contribute a certain um amount
079of money uh every year to parks and wreck for the high school turf to help them with the upkeep. There's something about the the practice fields >> that the parks manage that, but then now there's this thing with the green days where teams are practicing out of season, right? So then that's now creating an issue because the community leagues like again because it's not clear, >> right, >> who gets what >> and how things are prioritized. So this is the culmination of probably like three or four months or something. >> No, I meetings of listening. You know, it's >> I love the conversation. I do. I know we started late, but I do want to end on time. Eight minute. We do need one quick housekeeping item on approving the minutes, but um I do
080like to free conversation and one idea that I just came up with. Um and I'm going to add this to the So, we talked about virtual power plants, escos, triple PS. Um I I do think once we get our community members on board and we're starting to create these kind of working groups, um naming rights needs to be something that we we look at. Um I know I've brought that up to the I brought that up to the superintendent a couple of times. I think there's some appetite um to look into that but we probably do some homework around that. on can I go back to an earlier agenda item which is you had asked for input on the staggering of members um and there is a a recent example of which I'm aware in
081New Mexico where they shifted from a elected public utility commission to a appointed public utility commission and uh they did want to have staggering it was three members and they started all three members at the same time, but they had one member appointed for one year, second member appointed for two years, third member appointed for three years. And so everyone started the same time, but uh different durations. And so when people were interviewing, they understood I'm interviewing for a one-year position or I'm interviewing for a two-year position, right? And uh so you could start all five members at the same time and just have, you know, two for one year, two for two years, and one for three years. and then it'll naturally rotate. Um it will be a little uneven since there's an odd
082number, but that's one solution uh to address your earlier question. >> No, I agree. I think that's so that that was the intention of I think that we're on the same page. may not maybe wasn't outlined clearly with that. So they would all start April 1st of 2026 and then one year, two year, three year, two members, two members, one members that and yes, whether we, you know, maybe it's one of those things where it's like, well, maybe I don't want to do this. I'll sign up for one year and see how it goes. That type of conversation. U but no, I I completely agree with that. So um all right, let's get these minutes approved. Um so we're going to go back to item 1.02, O2 approval of the minutes. And Kevin, I know
083you're going to make those two technical adjustments uh inserting the link and um committee community from from community to school board. >> Yes. >> Is that done >> or you just you're going to do it? >> Yeah, I'm going to do it. So, all right. >> So, that will be done. Is there a motion to approve the minutes as discussed with those two technical edits? Miss Mirror, is there a second? Mr. Dunn, all any discussion? No. All in favor? That's unanimous. Thank you. Um, with that, uh, our next CPDC meeting is January 15, 2025 at 4. We might adjust the time. I just I know that 4:30 maybe may be tough for folks, especially bringing committee members on board. U, but it's here 4:30. Gate House 1600. This Fairfax County School Board Comprehensive Planning and
084Development Committee meeting is adjourned as of 7:25 p.m. Thank you. Yeah, I