>> Okay. We are reconvening. The October 14th 2025. Regular meeting of the Fairfax County School Governance Committee will now come to order at 04:14PM. This lady has
submitted a written request to attend today's meeting virtually to a medical conflict. She will be attending today's meeting from Herndon, Virginia, on favor. It is unanimous for those at the table. Is this Leon
Yetter. On way, OK, great. Okay. In order we're going to certify the closed meeting in order to comply with Section 2.2 dash. 37, 12 day of the code of Virginia is necessary for the committee to certify
that since the Fairfax County School Board Governance Committee convene a closed meeting on October 14th 2025. to the best of each member's knowledge. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements and only such public business matters as
were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard discussed or considered by the committee during the closed meeting have a motion. Dr. Anderson, a second, Mr. Fresh all in favor. That is unanimous for
all of us at the table. Okay. We have confirmation of action taken in closed meeting. Miss Mayor and it's me I call on
you Dr Anderson, for a motion. terrible. I make a motion to move policy. 26 11 has discussed and the closed
meeting. >> To the or you have. So I don't see 82 41st, I didn't know we had. I was working for memory here. Same thing
>> I move that the governance committee said policy. 82 40 as revise and discussed and close to the full board for adoption. Second. All those in
favor. We are unanimous. For that motion. You've got to stop typing Christina. icon Dr Anderson, for a second motion. I move that the governance
committee Sen policy. 26 11 to the full board for approval as amended along the terms and conditions discuss closed in the close motion to have a second. Saint John, cutting all those in favor. That is
unanimous at the table. All right. So those policies on their way. So. Here we are in the public portion of the governance committee meeting
and what we are doing is we are prioritizing review of some policies that have been reviewed and we just hadn't gotten onto the agenda. So
today we're going to speak specifically around first 3 policies and then we're going into a grouping of policies that we've selected that may
have if you are at its to do so. We're going to start with policy. 44, 50 communication between the school board and its employees. So Dr would you please present and bring us up
to speed on item policy. 44, 50. So thank you. Aaron >> Policy. 44 50, we updated. We added a philosophy section,
though. It's my understanding that may have that amended and that's new. And then we added.
Responsibilities and really that was Those were the basic changes at this time. >> OK, Mr. Fresh, which kicks off.
>> I have to things I would like to change actually 3. I'm going read them in make motions. The first is an update to the philosophy, which is a little bit more
extensive than the other 2 have been because it's a little clunky in terms of reading it. So. The new philosophy would read the school board affirms its
belief. Full consideration be given to the concerns of its employees and encourages their participation in decision-making affecting their employment. With the
school system. Yeah. So I I move to. I've already shared this with everybody, but I'm
gonna put it in a fresh email. >> A motion by Mr. Fresh for the proposed language in a second, but Dr, Anderson, Mr. Fish like to. Talk further about that. person, no. Okay.
Is a language up on the screen affirms its belief. Is that the only? No, that's not the only thing. Yeah. I'm going everybody. I have an e-mail
ready. Or did he sent it? But this is 44 50. Including
everything in one. It should be in your inbox. And so Mr.
Fish can I confirm that this is language that you suggest to be included at pretty much all of the philosophy sections? Well, part of is, but there were some issues
with. Some of philosophies do not lend themselves to this formulation without other adjustments. Very most of them do. This one does not. And so.
The amendment that I sent and just recent. So it does at the school board affirms its belief that. But then there
are further changes. I just don't know how to make it any easier. This is the same one.
You're going to strike to give. So that reads belief that full consideration be given. To the concerns of its
employees and encourages their participation. In decision making. Affecting their employment with the school
system. So that is the language up there. And we will see this and leave it there because I wanted to remove the word employee from being used
6 times in one sentence. That's an exaggeration, obviously. And then to standardize the format. Okay. So that's the motion Mr. Fish has moved Seconded. They are
not speaking further. Does anyone else have comments received Jason Kenny? I don't either. So I will call the motion all those in favor. >> That is unanimous at the
table to adopt those edits. >> All right. Number 2 on Page one. It reads, This is the paragraph beginning. The
division superintendent shall establish and arranged to regular for regular meetings, blah, blah, blah. First question is whether we have to say Division superintendent. Every time we address the superintendent because we have
plenty of policies that just a superintendent. That's something to consider. Secondarily, I have an amendment to the end of this
paragraph where it begins. It shall also be the policy of. her language. So we're going to strike. She'll also be the
policy of almost there. There you go. So your to strike, it will also be the policy of you
can add the word. Additionally, comma, so it's additionally the school board.
Shao. directly from representatives of employees at times made available for this purpose during the school board's regular business
meetings. And the reason for this. Has made the motion. Okay. So the motion is to adopt.
>> Those changes under Section 4 responsibilities. Yes, Aaron, you guys holidays. I think I need to be clear about my presentation on this particular policy >> in the memo. There's a
highlight his from Ellen Kennedy. >> So we were a little unclear since this is a school board.
Employees were that this was employees and the school board office or employee employees writ large because employees writ large collective bargaining governs all of this and we would sunset the
policy. We weren't sure if you wanted a policy that was simply your direct employees. But I think if we do or if you
do want something that's your direct staff than we would want to craft something different. So at this point, this is what was initially drafted and then the realization because this was
drafted last year and then the realization with the collective bargaining agreement being completed, I would recommend sunsetting this because really the
interactions between employees and the board are now governed by the collective bargaining resolution. >> The other thing that I would that so I I made these
suggestions under the assumption that. I guess this is permissible collective bargaining. I didn't think it was hence. You'll see my 3rd at it was to add Section
Michelle be in compliance with the school divisions, collective bargaining agreement. Problem with that is you're basically saying we're going to do all of these things unless it's not in compliance with collective bargaining and none of these things are in compliance with
collective bargaining. So they're it is it is basically. Nothing can stop a staff member from coming to a board meeting in sharing their views
on any topic. Could be under collective bargaining. But it is an entirely other thing for the board to solicit. Commentary about things that could be. Collective
bargaining. And so I would be in favor of sunsetting the policy and in sun setting it at the meeting when we sunset it have a statement read with it similar to how we did on
other topics. >> Thank you, Mr. First, Dr, Anderson. And then I have come, couple of things. And I'm just going to try to speak to all of these things, even if some of them may no longer
be the case. >> I do think we need to identify division superintendent and all of the places because we are speaking to the division superintendent, not the assistant superintendent, not
the regional superintendent. We have too many people. >> With a similar title. That's because so it I think it it's we should be clear. Secondly. One of the things I
was going to ask under the response of a section is a break it up into 2 pieces and A and a B. >> And I understand the collective bargaining world. But we still have a space
where employees can still come speak with us in the Section 4 year. I'm sorry, 5 here speaks to grievance. So there's other things and vetted here. So I'm
not sure how we would treat that. I think grievances also addressed in the collective bargaining agreement. So you would want to the collective
bargaining agreement really cross walks to the >> But we do have a host of employees that are not. Under the CBA because they are
part-time hourly. Some are and some are not. We still have thousands of people that need some sort of communication from us. Do we tighten this up to say that? There's a CBA and
needs to be and according to I would hate to just we move this all together because that will shut down the opportunity. But anybody else to know how well can I go? Speak to the school board
granted, I do think that the first section under responsibilities, which is a range in regular meetings. >> That spoke a little bit more to 42 10's, which clearly don't need to happen. But we
have other people, too, that are not under a CBA that we'll want to be afforded the same. Well, they'll be one do want to be afforded the
communication path. We could take that back and think about. I would want to take that back to the collective bargaining team, too. >> Identify for you specifically who is not
represented and then what we might >> contemplate doing. But I think. This particular. Policy really? The collective
bargaining does cover for the vast majority of our employees. Change just one last thing. And I will say just going back to look at the title, it is communication
between the school board and its employees. So I wonder if we could lean more in 2, how and when folks can engage with us rather than through staff.
Which is typically what has happened with the 42 tense. That's it. Mr. Fish. >> With unanimous consent withdraw my Second Amendment
which we didn't finish. And I'd like to make a motion to sunset this policy. And direct
the superintendent. 2 work with staff on a potential policy for. Communicating with staff or not part of collective bargaining.
>> Okay. So lets just confirmed a motion made to sunset policy. 44, 50. And direct to the superintendent
to create a policy. We're language policy to gritty policy that develop to drafted a little a C for communication. Employees, not
governor called for getting correct. For board consideration. So that is made by Mr. First and seconded by
MS Engine coming, which will just get your motion Mr. Fresh. >> I think this address is the big issue. I think. When the board takes action at a future meeting. Needs to be
accompanied with the statement about why this is happening. It doesn't necessarily have to be time with a policy that. Pertains to non represented
staff. I think that that would probably accomplish. Macro level goals. This policy in particular. Virtually every
element of it is dictated by. Collective bargaining. And far more specificity that the board has already adopted and approved. Then this policy. I
think they're even parts of this policy that might contradict the collective bargaining agreement that we have. >> I agree. I think, you know,
this is the first year that we've had collective bargaining and I know their pain points because things he's to be done field way. I know that's kind of a hard adjustment for everyone for employees and school board
members. I think the more consistent we are in the and the more we follow what everybody wanted, then it'll just be easier for us to move
into that lane that everybody had wanted. Not just this policy but maybe other practices. Thank you, Doctor. Carson.
>> Thank you. My wondering I have 2, 1, Should we sunset Just revise it because essentially will have the same kind of title. >> Legal recommended
sunsetting it. >> And 2. How do we get to the stage where we have a red line copies? When a glaring issue?
In front of us, which is the CBA. I'm trying to figure It was edited before we had a CBA. >> So I was on governance when we get previously. So I that.
>> Okay. That was my other wondering. Thank you. I expect that nothing's coming to us. That isn't timely. So I would have expected that have been reviewed. I actually have I can support the motion and I
had that question. It. >> It suggested to also wondered about policy. 45 10 communication with employee organization. That one was updated in 2024 to reflect
current to bargaining 45. 10 is cross referenced in this policy. I as I so 2 things. One is as chair. I'd like us
to move us with the through this one. And then actually skipped a naming school facilities and spend the last 15 minutes if we can seeing what we can swiftly moved through Group B on this
policy. 44, 50, what I want to share is I had that same question about impacts of collective bargaining on several other policies. It was
the contracts policy. 41 10. That would seem to be something that would be. And just make sure. Staff here
this. Okay. You ready? So in addition to 44, 50. 40 also on our group E Group B today. 41
20 contracts. I this philosophy isn't really clear, but also talks about supplemental. And is this about the coaches? The other thing about assignment of
personnel policy, 40 to 30. That's not under collective bargaining suspension of employees which is policy 40 to 70. 40 to 80 layoff and recall 40 to 90 discontinuance
of employment. 44, 11 support employee obligations and rights. Even 40 for I mean, aren't all of these? Subject to collective bargaining now
are these and have they been reviewed? So, for example, 40 to 70.3 suspension of him. >> Employees which is 40 to 70
in the memo. It has actually the updated language is to reflect the collective bargaining language to you language. So we've gone through a number of these HR
policies as a result of collective bargaining to put the language of collective bargaining into the regulation. Well, that's the regulation. But is it the
policy, I guess? Look for Allison will. 44 50 is not reflective of collective bargaining right? So but now I'm being told that some of the policies in group B are
reflective. You can see how this could be confusing and so I'm fine. I'm fine to support the motion. 45 50? I think we also need to be clear as we
work through the vernacular with that we use and policies that unless we say school board office employees that division employees are school board employees are all of the
employees. In the school division. So can we be clear on that? So if it's as school board employees, that's all the people who work in the
school division and school board office employees would be particularly for the school board office. Okay. That's cool. And then do we want to just agree on Division superintendent? Rather than
superintendent for all intents and purposes, that seems like, yes, OK, great. So no other comments. They do have customers. All right. So I still call the vote for
policy. 45 50? The motion is to sunset policy. 45 50 and direct the superintendent to return. Language for those not covered under CBA collective bargaining agreement. All
those in favor. That is unanimous for those on the table, just it's 44 50 right? It is 44 50 apologies. If I missed said that, okay.
Wonderful. Let's turn to policy. 81, 70 naming school facilities because we will be doing the soon. Dre. Do you want to present an intro to policy aiming school
facilities and then Mr. Fresh is ready to go after that. Thank you. Aaron. >> purpose, the in the memo updating October 14th.
>> Is to establish policy regarding the naming or renaming and the permanent dedication or naming. >> It was reviewed and updated by the Office of Facilities, Capital programs, chief engagement and experience and
legal. Section one was rewritten for simplification Section 3, the philosophy section was added and the term renaming was added throughout
certain portions of the policy removed is their operational in nature. Several will statements were revised to shelves, reflect items the school board desires to be addressed in regulation. The
naming rights agreement paragraph Section 4 was rewritten for clarification and there's one legal reference. It's been updated associated with this policy.
There is a matching regulation. 81, 70. And matching the SBA policy. Is attached for your review. Thank you, Mr. Fresh. Yeah, I
agreed with. >> Want to Aaron's comments about this that the philosophy needed. A bit of work to align with. I think the spirit of the board, which is
encapsulated regulation. So I circulated a draft change to the entire. Philosophy and it would now read the school board of firms, its belief
that the naming or renaming of school facility serves to reflect the values history, diversity, Fairfax County, Public schools and its communities. This policy guys, the process for selecting names and this part could just
be second part could be cut. This policy guides the process for selecting names for new schools, renaming existing schools and dedicating areas of school facilities are grounds to honor individuals
who have made significant contributions to the mission of Fcps. So I'll make an amended motion to amend the philosophy.
>> Mr. For sure. Speak any further. If you mention. Okay, I really appreciate it. It's really clear. We talk about the 3 different reasons why we be doing things. You know, new
school renaming and dedicating an area. I don't that I want to sit to honor individuals. You know what her to recognize. You know, something significant were to recognize.
I don't know. I just. It doesn't have to be an individual right. So have I wonder maybe we can do it on that language. Well, we go forward here in this conversation. That's
reflective of the policy. It is. To maybe it's to honor individuals and happenings served. Because we could just
name of facility Western High School, right? Like it's that could be the new name of the high school. So names are just for the like the gymnasium or the. Auditorium. That's just
for the dedication. I see a dead hitting areas got it. Okay. Then fully in favor. Which is because I seconded. Other comments Dr. Anderson,
sorry. I when the open doing that Mr. Fish of trying to follow what you have provided. >> And what was currently there. This is in the
philosophy section, correct? Yes, the philosophy section as it stands, Red Lines is to recognize private and corporate entity. >> move. >> The dew drop that it what
you? >> What I just e-mailed around is the current. Okay. It's not what you said earlier. I don't remember exactly what I sent earlier version that I have in front of me also has this language. >> I really see that, but I
don't seem to have a new version that has come the subject line of the e-mails. 81 70, it just. Hasn't populated yet. Dr. Anderson,
the >> part of the sense that talks about recognizing private or corporate entities was connected to naming rights. So if someone were to pay for naming rights, they
would be recognized. But it wouldn't be if naming rights aren't a purpose. A part of part. So in the philosophy
section. >> Okay. I'm fine with what you've proposed because I was uncomfortable with the private in court.
>> Morning naming and renaming the reason I rewrote it and I really speak. >> me that peace is speaking to. The building, not necessarily an individual, Jim, that we're naming after
someone who's provided quite a bit. So I don't think I see. And what you are substituting >> provisions for private and corporate entities. Correct?
Yes, just philosophy, OK? So I'm fine with that. The other thing that I wanted to raise is going back to purposes. We're talking about just the vernacular, the purpose as it
stands is to establish a policy. That's not a purpose. The purpose here could be to determine to determine the provisions. We have to get to the activity. Do you want me
to give you the word after we finish? >> And I I was just going to speak to all of my things. All that. That's what I'm attempting to do, too. We have the motion for philosophy up. So let's address that. Firts,
please. All right. I'm fine with the philosophy that has been shared. >> Any other comments? Dr just
the naming rights isn't only for someone who's done some things, just the philosophy. It has nothing to do with the rest of the policy. >> Knowing over the naming rights were unless I can't see what you have that the naming
rights were in the philosophy that we submitted. I understand you took know they're not in the philosophy. But I do for me. I don't want
naming rights and here because that's a whole other conversation. And that's financial. My thought at this policy, as we're just saying, that naming renaming in
dedicating things for no fee when we have new renewed or want to honor someone. So by taking it out of velocity. Plus, taking it out of this policy. Not if the board
chooses to do that. Yes, that was last of it doesn't have to be a regurgitation of the entire policy that follows otherwise. What are we just caught? A summary? I mean,
like. What I'm proposing is something that is a philosophy around naming for the specific things. >> If there is an effort for other things we can get to that when we when we get down
to that, policy thing. >> No, thank you. And this was something again that we talked about with the last committee purpose and philosophy. And I think I've heard here that the philosophy is and these drafts really didn't hit it. And I'm
wondering for our next meeting should be school board members take a stab at it because it just doesn't seem like. You know, staff can capture what we as school board members want to bring to it. But right now there's a purpose to
establish this policy that talks about renaming and permanent dedication or naming. And that's different than what is proposed in the philosophy. It sounds like there's agreement with the
philosophy. I wonder if we can just not include a purpose right now. His addition the rest of my sorry, I don't want anyone's turn is we have motion on Fernando before
Okay. The motion is the philosophy. Right? It's just that the question is. It's a specific include naming
rights. That's the question that I have is its naming rights to somewhere else in this policy. It seems like it should be included in philosophy as what is our philosophy. People want to pay U.S. name something after
them. with what he is proposing a cake that some space. >> For us to bring up what you're discussing elsewhere. And I want this is a big why of why we're engaging in this
at all. And I think this is a good that. But you're saying I don't think I don't think you have to have naming rights on here. I think that the philosophies, this is what we're going to do if further
on in the policy we talk about naming rights are not naming rights. It has to follow the philosophy of how we met with the pair. Not. >> So I just don't think it has to be there. I think.
Overarching okay. Then the b***** then gets into the weeds, OK, that makes sense. It does. I think we're in agreement so we could vote on this time. It the waters a little bit more. I actually
think the second piece to what you have, which is this philosophy, guys, the process. >> For selecting names, that's the purpose. That peace will serve very, very well as the
part of it doesn't. If you read the whole sentence. >> It speaks a civic leader, dedications. Okay. Well, and let's not get again. We still
need to confirm that we want the general outline of policies to be purpose, philosophy, responsibility. So there's miss alignment over policies. >> So okay, I'm gonna go ahead and call for the vote. So all
those in favor of the motion to change the philosophy as appearing on that with the one spelling check updated for individuals. Please raise your hand. That is unanimous. Okay.
We have a philosophy. So here's where we're at. We have 15 minutes left. This is an important policy to consider and get approved to the board. Are there any burning things that remain? Yes, yes, I still
have gone, Mr. Fresh. All right. Page 2. With unanimous consent number. >> 6 should not be the sale of naming rights. We can talk about naming rights in a
moment, but I'm cleaning up some language. Remove the word from sale of naming rights. Yes. Well, I mean, that speaks
specifically to sail. >> Without objection, we will adopt removing the word the >> I was unclear about why. The items on Page 2 were
bullet. didn't seem that they needed to be bullied. So I would without objection, remove those bullets. They are not dependent on the previous.
Section or nor the illustrative of that. So you just take the bullet out. >> Without without objection.
And then he removed both >> The final change was that there are 2 bullets and the sentence that follow that about naming rights. That didn't make any sense in the
way that it was constructed. So the amendment would be as follows the sale of naming rights only take place when a naming rights agreement is adopted. That's the first
sentence. And then you take the 2 bullets and you finish out tharagraph, which follows the style of this policy. So disagreement at minimum at a minimum shall not
confer on any entity and enforceable right title meant or other interest of any sort relating to the use, possession or control of any school board assets.
Additionally, comma, the agreement shall not confer on any into to the power to direct or controlled the management or operation of any fcps facility or program. That
is the language that I circulated to. Earlier and again, as we picked up this conversation. That is to
clarify if we are moving forward with the naming rights thing and I think we should. And then we can have a conversation about what those regulations look like. That kind of put that into practice
I think this is a good way of doing it requires you know that there's an agreement in place before anything happens, cetera. That's my. Amendment
for Page 3. >> Make a motion to adopt the proposed changes to naming rights as proposed. I don't need to speak to it. I think
Ron Capps slated well, Dr Anderson, joins between the naming rights language. Well,
let's about naming rights. Well, let me ask okay. We have 12 minutes left. Is there any hope of getting to groupie
policies? Do we want to talk a little bit more about? Future meeting? What do you all want to do? I think we should. We could probably tackle some of
the group B policies than I think. A conversation about policy naming are naming rights has got to go to another time. We agree on
being included here. That sounds like another financial. Conversation, right or something else. But we got to
make decision. We're trying to use this time. What I'm suggesting is the amendment. So amendment to update the
language. About naming rights. Is that here? Okay. So the
motion on the table, let's please act on that is Mr. First proposed it's about the sale naming rights only taking place when naming rights
agreement is adopted. I will I have the language here and I will personally go back and review it and make sure it is exactly as Mr for she nailed for 35 so we can vote. All
those in favor of that language. Please raise your hands. that is unanimous for us at the table. To adjust the naming rights, Mr. First, did you have other things
>> Questions about why we've removed. All of the other steps for. >> Renaming that used to be community meetings, scenery
actions, cetera. >> That's important. So you want without naming rights. But that's not Super And now at least we have something in
there that says that we have it. We have 10 minutes and we really should. Right. But this is involving something that.
It seems like we're going to need to talk about community gauge Mont more importantly than naming rights of some future agreement. If we want to get this to the board of the next regular meeting. So it's in place to name Western
High School. So I think the communication piece. Seems relevant. More urgent. You can use your question about community engagement.
>> I just ask my question about name us because that's what my question is. >> Dre, just so I'm clear. We don't have any spaces in which
we have sold naming rights, correct. What do we like? Stadiums fields? >> I am unaware of that here in Fairfax County, Public Schools. So this is going to
be a brand new practice. >> I believe that it's been because it it's.
>> Crossed out. That's a look here. I believe it's new. And then there's been cross status news. I'm trying look at both of the school. It's in the
current policies. So that's one a and it has existed just like, yes, it has. Executive limitations existed before they just hasn't been used. To. My knowledge is why we need to hold full
conversation. >> Is this that this is the policy around it. If not now, then when another time. So this time around, that could
be part of the regulation. I think right now with now 9 minutes left. Let's see if we can. I'm so sorry, And I'm not trying to be dense, but if
we're not speaking about this before we send it to the full board. So when do we speak about because we don't really speak about the regulations that that's not necessarily a drop of you there to share with us. After doing this policy updated before we
approve Western High school's name. I want a lot of things, but I also I'm trying to understand what is the next. The next step is approving
this policy. But for the meeting a plan schools may she play weeks. >> Extend the meeting by 15 minutes address these 2 lines of questions. Close up this policy and then we can move on
to what we can get done out of the option. I'm happy with way I'm just trying to figure out when that would be. >> It doesn't your happy to wait. So I would take Mister Frisch's recommendation if everyone can stay an extra 15
minutes to 5.15, I know I need to rent to a boundary meeting. >> If you want to ask your questions right now about naming rights. If others can stay. Can people say for 15 minutes? Is there an
affirmative? >> Yes, I'm fine with that. Okay. Then go ahead. Please. I mean, I think I started asking my question and then just it.
I'm okay. One more time to okay. So regarding the naming rights component, Dr, Be what are we anticipating? So what do we have a regulation right
now that speaks at that component. >> I'm looking. believe we have a regulation that matches 81 70 and it was posted. And it was effective. February of
2020. >> And it outlines. We go through the granular So so I didn't see it.
>> And it essentially talks about it has naming rights on Page 5 of the regulation to recognize sponsorship and contributions. And it has
limitations to naming rights, limiting them to an is an initial period of 5 years. They reviewed on a periodic basis and the boers live discretionary authority to
rescind a naming right at any time based on action of the entity I'm very familiar with doing naming rights and often
and the egg been in a prior division where a particular entity went with a 5 year contract $3,000 a month to have there. >> And to T as part of the
naming on the stadium, they read it all the signage and we utilize their naming rights to turn over the turf. Because we were in a you know, tight
budget community. So I don't believe we have any such agreements here to my knowledge in Fairfax County, public schools that has not been our practice, although the regulation does allow for
it as does our current policy. >> Thank you. My last question is regarding those limitations, you talk about the time. Do we have a location limitations, for example, with that?
>> Could someone potentially? Purchase the buildings as the name. The name of the building or is it turf? that kind of
space. Guidelines. >> Yes, ma'am, we do on Page 5 of the regulation section 7 indicates naming rights. She'll be assigned to appropriate areas of school
facilities, pair and library media center. Common area gymnasium or to school grounds pair and field Courtyard
Stadium and Perrin. Thank you. >> So one of the things that was surprising to me, if you look at the REDLINE version on Page 2 at the bottom. It
begins with. 3 paragraphs that are. Been stricken through. If the board decides to consider a school name change, there
will be bubbled up up up up. That spells out the process that we've used for the last several name changes sense. Justice after justice, right?
this is what we changed to adopt after justices govern Lewis. Mosaic and Woodson. Is
there a reason that? What I'm getting at now is is there a reason that we cut that and can we just an strike? Those 3 pair those paragraphs?
>> I believe the reason it was cut was that there's not a legal requirement for this policy. I believe the paragraphs are in the
regulation, but I there's absolutely no reason why they couldn't be under regulatory policy and they're in the regulation. I think that's fine.
>> The regulation is the embodiment of our policy is not just for staff. >> I think this raises a good point and I think also saying that are naming request needs
to be the report topic that still stays in there. And that's really not the only way it happens. There's also the comment about magisterial representatives. I wonder in the interest of time if that
if we Remove some of that or we organize it to say, you know, there should be inappropriate communication process which would be defined in regulation and school board
member involvement. You know, that could also be defined in regulation because this is all kind of. How we do things right now are. >> This is how we rename the
school. What you're describing is the dedication of pieces of the building or whatever. And that is described in detail in regulation. That's what you and I followed recently for 2
dedications. But this As the red lines through right now is how we've done all of the renaming said Yeah and justice and few positives been Look, the school running the request
will be initiated report from topic. >> And then magisterial in the large, correct? That's how I know. That's how we do it. But if we're there's a suggestion to remove how we do community
engagement the thing the language stays about aboard topic and we do more than just a form topic to have a new name. So right, like all of this. Is not I think what we
want to say, but we want to say is there's going to coming agent some sort rate whether we keep that in or different. I think the issue was be when it's a newly bought school
that already has a name. That was the stipulation around. I do. So I removed all of the stuff about purchasing schools because that's like a once in 100 years thing. >> And it's just a new school.
It doesn't have a name. It is our property in the western part of the county in the same way that. Dunn Loring doesn't have a name because he's not been named by our board. That justice had a name and Lewis
had and they were renamed and we have a policy for that. >> So I just want to be clear that the crux here is if the regulation is posted. >> And that the
>> what's in red and struck is in the regulation. I also think it could sit in the policy. We're just one of the asks of the committee has been to not be freed. And and so we
were just trying to. Do that. But I think it can be in both. That's important. It's something when we do it. Everyone wants to know site the staff have no objection and striking those 3. They
just all. So that's one point we didn't like do away with them. They're listed in the regulations want to follow it. Okay, but Mr. Fish you just said we're not talking about renaming but the philosophy we
adopted does talk about renaming. >> So it's not just any about naming renaming and dedications. is the name that somebody chose for a building
that no longer exists, whatever you have school. So if you can, then you go to renaming its. It's also spelled out here. It says. >> just think about like when you have a new baby, don't
have a name. So for us as a new baby. They're having. We're not renaming because it certainly may be more but then give. Yeah. So we're naming
it. Renaming is. But colleagues, the section is just look at the philosophy articulated naming and renaming and then areas of
facilities. Okay. Now the guidelines for school facilities is not as delineated. I understand you're saying that. >> We spell out in detail the renaming but don't spell out.
I think easily be solved if we an strike. All of the red stuff. Let me explain how from a process along with a set of blah, blah, blah. From that point down to the end of this
section, if you on strike that and in the first paragraph forces, a school renaming request, blah, blah, blah. It could be a school naming or renaming request and then that
takes care of. I all the same process. I think there's. >> I want to go back to what's been struck and I know it lives in the regulation, but the regulation, as we all
know, is subject to change by the superintendent. This is a board activity. I'd like it to be embedded in the policy itself. As Doctor Reed says staff has no objections. I'd like to motion for this
return. Back to this. I'd like for us to kind of mirror. The same sequence has MS. Marin is saying for renaming and naming of the procedures and consider
adding a community engagement paragraph to speak to the expectation of outreach.
>> In addition to the call outs for community engagement that are already there. >> Section. So we just put it together like the community
engagement easier path is that it's already there. And it doesn't require an additional amendment to get us out your height. Where where is it under? It's a title. It's in
the red struck through text about the 2 opportunities for community engagement. And then we have. Board agreed to.
Regulation for community engagement around facilities. Well, maybe just giving it a heading just so it gets the it stands out a little bit more. >> But I think as mayor and is
trying to get us out of here. And so it. And that requires us to approve a policy has done. We would be done if we
just accepted that. The previous language was sufficient because it includes community engagement. And there's no easy way to just put a section in for community engagement without sitting
here in wordsmith. Thing. >> Does the regulation have little bit more robust? Language about how that looks? Because I agree. I think.
Purpose of putting this in the policy in his overarching and say that the board considers that community engagement important leaving it in there. So I completely agree with that. I don't think we have to operation allies how that's going to last. The PDC unpack.
>> Developed with facilities, a robust communications and community engagement plan for all facility related. >> Items, then I'm good with that. I don't think we have to get down into the weeds at
this level. >> If I NDR Anderson's request and say to an strike, the language that's been removed entirely from a process along with to the end of that
section. And then in the paragraph that says. Where it says a process along with a set of guidelines it would now
say guidelines for naming or renaming. the following paragraph where it says a school renaming would say a
school naming or renaming. everything below that point is on stricken. Except for the
fix. Members. you finish and striking. And then in that first paragraph go back up. It
would say. Process along with a set of guidelines for naming or renaming. To the next full
paragraph. A school naming or renaming in the next paragraph. If the board
decides to. Consider a school name change. If the board decides to name a new school
or consider a school name change. And that last
paragraph on the page to During this initial comment period. Community members will be encouraged to submit naming
or renaming suggestions. And the final paragraph. If the school board votes in support of a new school's name. Or a
school name change. In support new schools. Name. Or a school
name change. Love. Love. Love. >> I could just add community Top of that section that says if the school board because that's who say there's 2 sections in there about
community engagement, right? But it could capture both of them. It will. It would encompass both of those. Because the very first one starts as if the board. Right
under the Darke section, the Black section, the first red section that's been. >> That's been an stricken. So that's the community engagement piece right there.
That could be sections. 6. And that will just take care of it. It becomes clear as to what the expectation are, what
the expectation is. >> I mean, I would be opposed because it's not only about. Community engagement and adding a heading does absolutely nothing to the
policy. >> That little section is only about from the bottom talks about the board voting on things. And and what final
action is, cetera. I sing a different copy than yours.
You're talking about before before the party begins, the superintendent will review level of law. Yes, above that.
I would say that an equal part of that sentence is the superintendent coming with
names. So again. What most what action can we take this
An offshoot of Dr Anderson's request for unanimous consent Riyadh. The stuff that was struck. Changes that now
account for new schools. >> And, you know, and we could move this forward and bring it to the full board. Right and let our colleagues also remain on it and we could adjusted at the dais. I think that's most
expedience. We can. We started the ball rolling. So can I call the question of the motion and go to a vote. Nobody no. Okay. So is there a
vote to reinstate the REDLINE version about community engagement? Those 3 paragraphs trade discussion with the changes just discussed. They
are. That is Those 3 the way through the end of the section, the school facility rate yet. So those 3 paragraphs about communicate Mont with the changes just discussed all those in favor,
Mr. Fresh decision pending doctors and myself. So that is unanimous. So we will send this forward to the board for action. Which means we can
also discuss it with her colleagues prior to that. And we are on schedule. Amazing. Of the group. The policies are
there any that anyone has no questions on that? We could possibly move forward. I have 4. That I've no questions on. No, you don't have rain. Remember, this is supposed to
be the ones that have. >> understand that minor all. With very few exceptions, very basic things that are like changing the FA lot. All of them are changing the
philosophy part to the school board affirms its belief. handful of them are a little bit more detail than that. But only changes the philosophy. >> Anyone else have anything
to say that the group E policies. I had no questions on. 26 60. Which is voluntary
uniforms and public school. 41, 0, 1, which is responsibilities of the Department of Human Resources. 41 40, which physical and mental medical. XM nations.
And 42, 30 assignment of personnel. >> But I try and get unanimous consent on some very basic things for all of these. Sure. All right. Policy. 33, 35
adding the school board affirms its belief to the beginning of. The philosophy and striking the philosophy of Advanced K 12 programs is the
belief. >> Is there any way to do this like by chunks of policies do you they're all a little bit different? If there's no objection, we can get through quickly. There's no objection
for me. Okay. So that will be changed. Yeah. I'm gonna come back to 33. 55. Because I had to rewrite that one. Policy. 34 15. We are only adding the
language. The school board affirms its belief that at the beginning of philosophy. there any objection? All right.
We're good to chains and 34 41 0, 1, also needs more changes. But 41 20. Adding the school board affirms its belief that.
The beginning and then last sentence, these contracts. It's protect both parties and ensure. I'm okay with that.
Any objections? Policy? 41 40, we're just adding the school board affirms its belief that the beginning of that one, 41, 40, no objection. There. 42
30. We're adding just the school board affirmed its belief that the beginning of that one, 42, 40 Z, 42 0rd, 40
to 30. 22 30. No objections. And then a 40 to 75 work striking by creating a framework and adding the school board affirms its belief that at the beginning
of that and then after the words school year at the word framework. I don't see any objections. No objections, 40 to 80. Add the school board
affirms its belief that the beginning of that section and then strike the period. The layoff and recall policy allow these practices to happen. I
have no reaction. No objections, 40 to 90. This is identical to the previous one with a slight change of of the policy name. 42 90 is the
same. Philosophy is 40 to 80 except there's a policy name difference. It's identical. Mr. Fish, you have e-mailed all of us this and a clerk. So
it is their in writing. And I I did review it and I liked all of it. So thank you. 44 11, we said okay. For a little. 44 11. Just adds the
school board affirms its. You know what we could do is if everybody has this document open in front of them, we could just accept it. I that whatever you said. And it's
been sent to the clerk. Well, that's wonderful. None of this is the substance of the policy. It's all about the 4th floor, right? And so going forward, we hope that that's what the flush begins with. But we didn't get to talk
about that. Is there any agreement that any of the policies I just rattled off? 26 60 about uniforms. 41 to one about responsibilities of
Department of HR. >> 41 40 about physical mental medical examinations and 40 to 30 assignment of personnel. I'm fine with all of them going forward. Okay. With this
philosophy change, right? And whatever was proposed if they changed, correct, if they're at its your say with those the comfortable with and 42 account of. I'm not
comfortable with the entire slate. right. Well, I'm fine with, but you much. So it sounds like. We're going to adopted. Without objection, we will adopt the changes that
Mister Fresh submitted by email. To the philosophy. Portions of the noted policies. that be fair to OK,
and then I would make a motion or without objection to move forward to board action policies. 26 60. Which is
uniforms. 41. 0, 1, which is department of H R. 41 40, which is the medical examinations. And 40 to 30,
which is assignment of personnel. Without objection, those 4 will go forward and the other ones will be updated. Remain in group B.
And we can review that. I think in terms of the next meeting, I'd like to regroup with each of you and just determine what we think is achievable. But we did a lot.
So way to go and we might need a little bit longer in general. I mean, maybe if we just not the zone to 2 and
half hours, so. Okay, Mr. C a a absolutely yes. If that's
kind of what I was doing with just these 4, but absolutely so if the clerks wouI guess update the ones that Mr. First outlined in those. But
let's talk and but that's what will work on next time. And the one that we didn't get to today on the main agenda, which was broadcast in curricular and extracurricular events, but well done, so
moved to policies from closed. 44 50 about communication, 81, 7 of school facilities and 4 of those other ones as well as clean up some philosophy language. Thank you. All
right. This meeting is adjourned at 05:15PM.