>> I did not get. It would
take a live 3 full hours to
up.
Yes, all of them. I'm
going to Michigan. Bringing an
airplane back.
>> So we for those watching at home are slightly delayed for some technical difficulties
but will be starting in the
next few minutes.
Okay. The time is 04:50PM. This is 10/30/2025. Comprehensive playing a development committee. Meeting of the Fairfax County School board will now come to order. Thank you, everyone for being here
this evening. I know it's been busy in terms of facilities and boundaries and all kinds of stuff. We've been running. Ragged around the county to at least me as an at-large member. I know we've been all over the place and I this near
and the Sizemore Heizer have as well. So thank you to staff for being here and staff for helping facilitate the meeting. We're going to go ahead and dive right into the
conversation unless anybody has anything they want to. Remark on. So seeing and hearing none the next order of business agenda item one to
educational specifications. So this was a topic of conversation to board meetings ago from the diets that are regular school board meeting and in response to that are
requested that we I I decided rather 2 agenda eyes. This is a topic of conversation. I don't want to delve too deep into this. Really the purpose of this was to determine whether or not we wanted to do
a full school board work session. The Ed Specs, the document that was circulating response, that board conversation has been posted online. It's titled Fcps
Educational Specifications. Summer Eats a 2 pager. So what I want to do is kind of propose that we approach this
and the Jeff Bezos, fashion of tackling meetings, which let's all take a couple of minutes to thumb through that document, jot down any questions that we have and then we'll ask those questions here. And then we'll make a
determination after a conversation as to whether or not we want to move to a full work session to have a board presentation on dads backs. So
let's take a couple of minutes just to kind of read through this 2 pager and then we'll
have a chat and go from there.
Does that work?
OK? Thank you. And we're I have a list of a couple of questions, but I want open the floor for conversation. If anybody would like to go first. Besides Mars
or >> have several questions. First, I think on the topic of whether we have a work session or not it and I think I'd want better understanding of what was the purpose of the work
session be and what would we want as potential outcomes just to get. Because informational is that to give feedback? Is it too make
changes like that's would be one of my questions, Mavis informational or maybe to get feedback. Maybe I would recommend have to be combined with other sort of hot topics
in facilities. And we've talked about different procurement at algae. Different design. Build. Not that I you know, so I think instead my worries, you do want to add specs. You do something it. having too many
different work Sessions, right? So I would recommend if facilities work session. That's informational to help the board better understand what goes into some of these things would be my suggestion as opposed to one on specs
particular and perhaps I would recommend a cbdc chair. I made this committee could talk about it more, but you could be even maybe do a survey to talk to staff at what kind of
with staff recommend that it would be helpful for the board to know more as we go on to the community because I will say is one board member. I do think there are a variety of areas of facilities that we could learn more about. That
would help us in like Rpt in community meetings. But I don't always even know what those topics should and shouldn't be. So perhaps I would ask you is chair to work with staff to kind of flesh out of possible list of topics for this committee to discuss
if we were to do a facilities were sessions that sky overarching comment on that on 82 30, the mean 81, 3 seed in
the regulation. I think this. If we do this work session, it may behoove us to dense and the policy to governance. One of the things I noticed missing in his policies is no
sort of value statement on specs. One of the things that the previous board did is we require new construction to have outdoor learning spaces. MS Mammy members were on the board together when we did,
which I think is great. But that was clearly a value statement. The value and the data and research find outdoor education. But the policy itself just says that the job of the division superintendent is to develop these at Spec's
in the new construction to be planned in accordance with. But it doesn't really say like overarching value or introduction that would help them guide superintendent in
what the boards, you know, I think of setting policy like what direction I want to get involved. The operations in the new ship at Spec's. What sort of are we looking for
equity lens? For example, we look from may best practices and education all done. You know, the outdoor learning wasn't in the board, brought to facilities. So I think that might move us in. That comes
facilities. Do we want to look at that regular that policy to just kind of give a value statement is what I noticed. The other thing, I think in consistencies in the
regulation itself that jumped out at me the sorry, the regulation requires that the instructions Services Department will develop the Ed
Specs. In cooperation facilities, transportation it except arrested me to review. But the policy says specs belongs. The superintendent
instructional special services and facilities, but special services gets left out in the regulation, which is a huge problem. >> Because that special services where a special education laws. So I think the
I are priority is I would recommend the regulations say the chief academic. Officer or department because the chief academic officer overseas, both special services and instructional. But I think
there's a leading off a very important department from the policy to the regulation that is more urgent to be addressed. Now the regulation belongs to the superintendents leaving that to you. Take a look at. But I think it should
be updated to include that. Those are the 3 things that jumped out at me. >> Okay. All right. Thank
>> okay. So let's go to miss mayor and then I'll I'll respond to your. >> Comments after his great. >> I really appreciate what you aside for highs are I was thinking very narrowly about
at Spec's. And as I said to our chair, we have so much going on with Couldn't imagine starting this. I asked at the dais and now I kind walked that back because it's really
not something I had all want to delve into. And of course, you remember from the governance committee. So, you know, our governance committee just put forth a very big policy to to help move our
procurement options, you know, expand that and be more effective. But as you know, from our motion Lincoln, 24 in early 20 for the governance committee is yet to go through that whole analysis. And I
have the list. And that is something that the governance committee has waiting in the wings. So absolutely we should be looking at policy. 82 40, but I think it's got to happen. And I don't even know
if it's on that list that could put up a put that. OK, don't want it. But here's the thing. there's so many
policies that need review. It's if I find sometimes I get to one step and I'm like, oh, wait, that's not reviewed. So I got to go to different things. So I guess the bottom line is absolutely need to
review that policy. I have been asking for regular work sessions about facilities. So I so appreciate you raising that missile riser, especially given everything that's going mean, I I think seems Mr.
Gordon, every day and his team and last week as well, given our meeting this morning with the county that will talk boundaries. We absolutely need a meeting and we could
certainly put all these things on there. Again, really don't thing at Spec's is where to start because let's do the policy and maybe that's, you know. Let's look at it as junk
together, I think as we can. So that's where I'm at. Yes, you're going. One of things I was thinking about as you're talking. And I agree with made
a whole list of the motion right in 20 Ford. I'm glad you brought that up. This man with all the >> policies I would say looking at this policy, what I recommend is probably a nice to have, but I think it's not needed for this policy per se
to then dealt a little morning to facilities in general. And I do actually think a work session on facilities. I don't know. mean, and I would defer to the chair, you know, vice chair of the school board
around timing. But I think in conjunction with our cip work makes lot of sense because focusing on facilities are for cip. I just think having that knowledge base is and what
isn't ads back, what is what goes into it? There's a committee that reviews it every year. You know. And so I think who's on that committee? And perhaps through that
conversation, some values around what we're looking for in general and our school spaces could come out. And so I think without having to redo the policy having a chance for the board to sort of give some
feedback on what we're looking we would like to see your thinking on facilities and having the staff be able to share with us. Here's the things that we consider when designing a school. Here's the things that we consider in looking at spaces. And here's
that. Maybe even some of the challenges know a previous board talked a lot about, you know, quiet rooms and sensory rooms and all of these things and be helpful. I think rains
from some of these things to hear from the staff like, here's some are challenged our buildings, including some of these other spaces. So I just think overarching. Knowledge, facilities conversation and we
could talk about maybe what the different topics they do. The next could be a topic amongst that. You know, just to kind maybe just even a high-level. Here's what the effects are. Here is the kinds of things we think about. Just
for the staff to have an idea that we staffer, bring us something. They've already kind of gotten it this good of but big convtion with the board kinda know how the board things on this and the board has a better understanding
with the staff is doing to maybe help prevent, you know, okay. Well, what is this and why are you doing this when we have common? Foundational knowledge together? That's what I was thinking is when
it's about that. No, I agree. So. >> I did have some technical questions. So before we get into that, so guess from
staff's perspective. And do these may be topics for the work session that we will probably scheduled first of the year. What I'd like to understand more as the on
specs in particular. What is the board's role if any? Versus operational staff for? Because I know this is a very technical document. I know the
master specifications or even a more technical document. Operating within that framework. Where would staff and where you're where would
your division kind of see? If any the board having a hand in the specs. So looking.
>> Document said Spec Summer, smash Respect, you really more about high building. Something construction materials. Standards for testing
requirements of materials. specs are more like a design. Guide your So, you know, seeing that risk. So seeing the rest position when you're, you know, 60%, you're looking to get a guaranteed maximum
price. So you would some point you hand that. Even in the design build. But it seeing record and that as a bridging document right? So see him we have more control as the owner. First design. Build
your hand it over and they're using that. Basically as a template help design kind of footprint because we generally that he would have classes are standard size. You know this,
you know. 700 square feet. The standards that give them how build a model footprint to build something out so they put from the you know, from you all could be a wee. We
have X budget right? We don't have enough money to build out our current requirements. The Nissan Red Specs. We want 100 square feet per class base. Is
that reasonable? You know, could we? Is there possibly of downsizing some of those square footage is to maybe get more bang on about that might be guys that were looking for
him. OK? That makes sense. Yes. So basically the Ed spec is. >> And the master specs are how you get through that map.
kind of a fair way of yes. So the >> that's Beck's are going to help develop and build the program bill that footprint and Nats respects are going to
tell you how to do it that OK, perfect. That makes sense.
>> So my other question is, with in the end, I think, you know the answer to this within the Ed Specs. If the board
were to look at at Spec's, I think the way Ms Sizemore Heizer kind of set up this process. Is we look at the policy that drives the
regulation that then drives that specs a master specs. So if the board were to at some point review the policy, which I presume is 81 20. That would
tend to make it more of a values guide that would then have more of a trickle down effect through regulation and then through the specs both Ed and master. So perhaps that's the way to go about reviewing
this instead of. What I don't want to do is open up a technical document, too. To them. Yes, you correct. You talk in the pages, you know,
one versus another, right? Pretty. >> lot of stuff. It would be problem possible to review your level. The national specs. >> Yeah. respects is in for the folks watching at home
master spec just. Be looking at which is all available online, by the way, for folks want to look at his house of pages of very technical.
Construction I do like the suggestion. You know that maybe the governance committee you know, this mirrors the chair that committee. When
it's appropriate, could. 81 20 on their agenda to take a fresh look at. And I also like the idea folding this into a broader conversation on
facilities versus a stand-alone work session on at SPECT. So I guess. Without objection, I will work with the school board chair to
schedule work session on facilities overall. And I think one of the other items that was not on the agenda, but that could probably the driving point that conversation is the facility
condition assessment that I know we're barreling towards very rapidly. Do you? So I was going to ask that question. Do you have do we have an update on the FCA procurement? We're
still. Still with a finance and legal. >> So we're ready to go. We just ways paying for approval to go forward. You notice to
proceed from legal and from. >> We know about how long that's going to sit with them. I don't. take that as a duo. I was expecting it to complete by now. >> But right, I thought late
October was kind of are working. So so what I'll do is I'll work with the chair to figure out a work session, all use the timeline of facility condition assessment, procurement to kind of drive that conversation and then
we'll figure out a couple of the topics to fold into there. It would more than likely be after the first of the year at this point. Just clarifying question like that. So on the
facility work session, is it just design? >> Planning programming was also on piece of that as well as a full. Everything we do.
>> The facility could update on the FCA procurement. And the timeline for that is definitely a topic of conversation. I would want to have a conversation around.
Whether or not the full board wants to. And what the timeline would be to address the 81 20 policy. With governance. That's Beck's the
aspect policy. So instead of this commission and so instead of CPD see today deciding we're just going to send at SPECT for review. We're going to have a full board conversation about that. And
then. Besides Mars or >> what I would recommend. To be honest in terms topics for this facilities. Work session is I would. Maybe the 3 of us
sort of this committee can brainstorm. And then once maybe even today, once we brainstorm, I would recommend. Mr. Again, you'll use chair to talk to staff about what they think makes sense. And I think
we should start with my suggestion is what's the purpose of this work session? Because once we get the purpose of the work session, then we can feel topics for looking at topics that knowing. But what's the goal
against the purpose? Like what is the goal of the work session? >> If I may, I would suggest that I think the goal to work Sessions building greater understanding with the board
and the community around some of the bigger topics that go into our facilities, work, right. That may have impacts on our school construction. They shun and maintenance so
off the top. My head like some of the things I could think of was it in the 20 to 30 to process would important to talk about. Yeah, I was in the plows. The planning commission
liaison last 2 years. I've been, but just going tap is we don't have to do these right. I think talking a little bit about what specs are but goes into those and how that changes over time might be
important. I think. Talking about this is another chance to lay the foundation of the of the challenges Ron facilities like the wire. We had a 42 year. 45 renovation cycles. One of the challenges
around that. I mean this off the top my head. But I think if we could talk about the purpose of this meeting, then we can have a better sense of what the topics on. Yes, so,
you know, be updating in a little bit about our meeting this morning with the Joint facility Committee. And we talked about all sorts of things this morning in honestly. >> Whatever work session we have could be directly as a
result of that. I mean, I think it would be best. I would love to see the school board have a work session, part of a work session every month focused on something facilities related because it
is our top saying, you know, we're already in November. So it makes sense to roll it into the cip presentation. But already today, even either has I learned a bunch about how
the county's bond program works, that I think is critical for the whole school board to know. And so the Board of Supervisors talked about bringing well, actually the 20 to 32 doing a
one-on-one session at our next joint facilities meeting. So there's so many connections here. And I think, you know, as Kyle and I get even deeper in the weeds here, we're really gonna know. And so I
just have to say again, I don't think it's Peck says that at but also wanted to mention, says workers are governance and Mr for she's been really great about this.
Bringing really articulate, articulate values statements to the policies. So absolutely. we're really cooking with that. So that's a definite thing. So I just
wanted to share those things. sure, that's fine. So my my my takeaway is, will >> work with the board chair to schedule a work session on facilities in general. And
then we'll work with members of this committee to kind of figure out what exact topic to want to fold into that. Mr. Gordon's this January when the
Cip came to the board. You know, I had worked your predecessor on presenting things in a way for the board to help fill in some of these gaps in knowledge that we have had in. And that's where we
got this great data about the status of a Purcell. A tease in the facility condition assessment came forth and then in the spring, Mr. Dunn, I helped bring to the board presentation about the
alternative work your Mont pathways, which is what resulted in the policy being passed just last week. I mean, that was like really great time line. But we also had expressed interest in the P 3.
But even that now seems a tiny bit premature because there's just so much is coming to light rain and we Western high school. So anyway, there's lots to But just want to share
that background history. Yeah. >> So there's no the comments on this agenda item we can move forward. So will, again, the takeaway was scheduled work session. Agenda item.
1.0, 0, 3, or businesses. You 1.0 3 update on policy. 82 40. I'm not gonna rebuilt in the print to seize essentially and you miss Mayor, this is in
your committee. Not can spot. But essentially what we did is we had it is I've kind of phrase publicly, you know, more tools in our tool belt for how we can go. Tackling
the challenge of facilities, construction renovation. We added 2 key items. Design build and I'm not mistaken. Seymour. Construction is a construction management at
risk. And for those watching at home, you can Google it or use AI to kind of figure out what the answer is or we'll have a quick conversation
around that. But long and short, the industry evolved. So these 2 procurement methods have not been at the disposal of the school system to use for construction renovation
and now they are. So I don't want to get too in the weeds on the differences of these. you know, if his staff is able
to kind of very briefly. Go over D B and are I could open the floor for discussion. If there's any questions on that.
They think so holistically. I think we would still want an option to have traditional design bid, build design, build and see him at risk. >> Design build and see him at
risk. In theory, give you a faster procurement cycle process. Design build is you present breezy bridging documents and the owner loses
some kind of control. Some control that fish are now relying on architects protection. Engineering team because, you know, collaboration to give you the products, you give them up. Prada project give you a
solution and it's wide Oh, look at. Options. You know that Herman options for you and you get to select is unknown right? With seeing
that risk. You and the design build huge. Only have one contract with CM at risk. You have 2 contracts. So you're bringing in a construction manager on board going to be
the owners are out. That's one contract. about 60%. Design documents that. Construction managers going to give you an estimate give you a guaranteed
maximum price. And then. He works or you know, that that person, that individual works to bring on a a construction firm and then they oversee the construction process as long
as we are introducing as the owner, more scope the project. They own the risk. Up to the guaranteed maximum price and so I think between the 3
design bid build its lowest design. Build is fastest. And seeing that risk is fashion design bid build. Slightly slower historically than design build. But added It's
great. That we have now have that ability. The state law has a nuance in there. They think design builders, more for complex projects. And so I
just think in the kind of the 3 processes. I look at high schools, more complex prod projects I bought a longer time sequence phase. The multi-phase project would be
more aligned with ACM at risk. Type program and maybe elementary schools. Middle schools might be more suited for design. Build. It's kind of quick. It's not yourself a
question. I have. We've added these 2 different procurement methods were obviously retaining all the existing procurement methods
>> just so again, I'm clear we're still looking at what's going to be. >> Across all of our portfolio, all of our projects new construction renovation ever. Baby. We're still
keeping. Time and cost as the driver of whichever method. That we choose. So we're not just saying, okay, we're going
to get this method even if it may cost more. What we're doing is we're adding more options. Our disposal to look at the unique needs of each of our facilities then.
>> Again, purpose of design build. And, you know, the CMA risk is in theory. In theory, you have less change orders as long as the owner. We're not introducing additional scope
or changes into the process. We have questions. >> Just a quick question. Do you have criteria that you're developing or have developed on which of the methods that
you prefer for any particular project. >> Between the unit who added design bill designed to build I as the chief would look to
use more complex projects for CM at risk comes says I'm bill diversity. I'm at risk. I think it's suited for that. it's intended to bring a construction manager and
who's, you know, maybe see things differently than you are, especially for a multi-phase project. So like a high school, I'd more geared toward high school and then more complex and then design
build. We could use more towards elementary school, middle schools. But again, we could use him risk at all. 3 of them. >> Is there one that? Potentially could be more cost-effective than another
was? It is really depend on the type of complexity. The project. >> Given the fact as the owner. our history is the
owner, we're going to want ability to have some control the project. So I think we're because it is the nature of the beast were more suited to do see him at risk versus I build. Because I think we want
to ownership have some changes. First design build, you lose. The ability to. Control the process. >> So that's but my last
question, at least to that since the level of control changes, right? Depending on which when we use, does that then impact the community engagement process and plan?
Because few years ago. Before you are on this board make annual the board had review with ccr communications and community engagement plan to
go along with construction build. And so I didn't know if we need to relook at that. That might be a topic for CDC to relook at based on the 2 or more the different procurement
in same building that methodology because if let's say we use I'm bill, we lose control earlier in the process of the design and how that we may need to shift how we do community engagement to make
sure that voice is heard earlier versus if we have more control throughout the project, I believe and it's been a couple years. But what OCC are presented to it was
mentioned a work session. But it came through CDC. The initial process was that was designed with multiple touch points along the way because we had the ability to make
changes until a certain point, of course, in the construction process. So that may be something we want to look at, because I know one of the concerns around 20 to 32 in the whole. 22 32 conversation
is ensuring robust community engagement. So I wanted I think there's a crossover here between the work we're doing on this joint committee on. 22 32 in the Planning Commission
Education Committee on 2032 and the the multiple options pick your meant and how do we make sure the community engage in pieces as robust but also tailored to each just of them
were put on your radar to talk about. >> Ever heard And I would say were looking for communication
without the process to provide feedback on design that could lead to changes. Then it was more of a see him at risk type scenario for more complex. I think you're going to see that more in a complex project like I school.
>> I think what I was trying to really get out is that whatever process we use. We want to make sure that the at the Times where it's not going increase our cost per se or or
that fits within that process has played better way to say it that there's room for that community engagement and the initial communication processes bill for that was designed with one. Yeah, I think that the CRA risk
process not with the new process. I think there's just room to make sure that whatever the communication process that was designed it was in 20 on us. It was in 2020 Rio. It was 23. We had a
work session on opening a back and look. And we did the board. Never end up voting on it. But staff is that they were going That was just what information on that. They were going use this method. But we I just want to make sure to
know my commitment to the 20 to 32 conversations. >> Sizemore Heizer that food was on at the November. 20th 2023 work session.
>> November 29 news right after my chair term. It was. So I think because the CDC was working on it during return, which is 20 to 23. And then the work session was in November of 23. Remember
dating Kevin November 28th were 28. So you may just I 200 on the radar because think there's I don't want to get caught at the end saying wait a minute, we have a community engagement process that doesn't fit our design, build
process. So. >> But fully acknowledge, I think in our current construction process, you know, we do allow for, you know, facility updates like we did Falls Church high school to redo the spring. fallen through the process. Yes,
ma'am. >> Its mission, that process that you have fits with water process using for design and build. Okay. Thank you. Is
that we want So and so that you just said that because I literally was saying a must read Daniel K. So at one point we did this communication think as I've seen it in action. >> And it's 2 and I'm
wondering this kinda. Challenge with a 22 32. That is the state law which the county, you know, needs to apply, you know, abide by. I
remember there was a discussion. was when you 2 were at Planning Commission earlier this year. That subcommittee. But I thought that that maybe we had a conversation that our plan,
our process from November, 23 would be applicable. So I was gonna try and dig and find it. Right. And I just wonder, I think it's even before the next joint committee meeting
saying, hey, we have this process, could this suffice? Because it's much shorter and I've been to them. I remember we had the Web pages right? So anyway, I just that's exactly what I think we need to follow
up with. Yeah and codified if it's not right. And that could be part of the policy work is.
I just wanted I want feel great. I don't take. Yeah, no, it's fine. I mean, so the yes, the 20 to 32. You. When I was
on when I took office last year, we were working towards 10, played a boilerplate plan, so to speak on community engagement. >> that way we could were, however, the planning
commission, the county side of the house to say, OK, here's how we're generally going to go about community engagement across the entire portfolio. And then just run that process. It was more
predictable. And of course, predictable drives down the timeline so I think that's going to be the key to this. 22 32 conversation. And it
does need to fit into design. Build design, bid, build, are whatever process that we use. >> Just really quickly because I was on planning commission night, we had several meetings. One of the concerns,
I think with the whole 2032 conversation was to ensure that we have that community engagement. It was actually a big part of that conversation when you and I was planning commission and then I stayed. I just came off the planning
commission liaison this last I stayed was Mateo and I before Scott. And so I've been involved that process. That was big concern. And I know staff presented the community engagement process to the Planning Commission and
committee at least a couple times. So you may want to talk. I know Janice was there presenting, but I don't know whether like we see Young but Hall's group presented with them. But I know is presented
a couple times and they they were given feedback from the Planning Commission and committee as well. So this definitely overlaps with that. And so just do you think would just they were clear kind of
the pop Ford and reviewing it may shift that I just wonder that that has been presented to them. So this is a process they are aware of. So for them to make tweaks to that, if it, you know, design build all the stuff we need to make sure
that that we keep the robust nature community engagement. Mr. Putin, I just looked up link and I sent it to you from November meeting and happy to send it to you all to refresh,
too. >> So it's like it's just facilities all day long. Literally. But this morning's has Mizeur again understand. I wish I had from my slides to the slides from this morning
this Monday because we had a slide that the and then I will be most to you. We just haven't been.
>> been going. But we talked about this. The one Fairfax lens. County school County schools, parks, right? And so
that's wonderful that can. We just have one public process. You know, that's to be expected by the public. Where can we find those efficiencies? So on, let's
come together like I think it could be really exciting. And we're gonna learn a ton to the boundary work like there's just the next few months I think had a lot of potential Pick out the things that work
and make all of our policies and processes better. So by threat.
>> Okay. So moving on agenda item. 1.0, 0, 4, next order of business agenda item for Roland structure of CPD. See an F pack
>> earlier this earlier, I 2 page document to get a kind of want to take the couple of minutes to review this and we can jot down our questions and
have the conversation. But on how we can overhaul the role between this committee and the community Advisory Committee. This kind of was charged with providing expert and put into
our capital programming. we'll take a couple of minutes. Look through the 2 page document and then we'll come back with
our questions and have a
conversation.
Okay. We're back. So. To give a kind of a a took notes version of this. So the proposal on the table is to restructure the
relationship between CPD see a standing committee of the board. Which stands for Comprehensive Planning and Development Committee effectively the committee that kind of overseas, the capital
program of the school system. And F packed the facility Planning Advisory Committee, which is the community citizen, you know, community member advisory committee that. Advises CPD Sea and the
board at large on the capital program. Seth Pack right now operates kind of separately from CPD. See. So what I'm hoping to do by this proposal,
his 2 more inject direct expert advice and right into CP, D C and the U.S. right into the board. And how hoping to accomplish that instead of
having to separate. Ford's 2 separate committees, the kind of, you know, operate, you know, on paper together, but more so independently. The
proposal is too set up a model that another one of our board committees uses, which is the audit committee. audit committee has board members with 2 community members that
are experts in the on it field said right on that audit committee. So what this proposal does is it puts 3 members of the community that are citizen volunteers.
They're experts in their field right on to see PDC. So the role the the size of CPD see would expand from 4 members of the school board. Plus the city of Fairfax
representative. And we would add 3 experts in the field that are community volunteers to that. So we go from 5 to 8 and they would all have kind
of seats around this big conference table and we can have life feedback from industry experts, pro bono. So with that will kind of open up the Florida conversation and
we'll kick things off. Sizemore Heizer. >> What I can stop by just taking the motion that we can have a conversation about the information. So I just might make a motion that I moved to direct the chair of the
comprehensive Planning and Development Committee to draw develop a draft. The proposed changes to AF Pak Un Cbdc and work with the school board chair to bring the matter to the full Board for action no
later than December 31st. 2025 there okay in this motion by Sizemore Heizer and a second by miss mayor and besides Mars, which I speak, your motion. >> I think you laid it out very well. And I think it would be very helpful to have
direct community feedback in here. Incident to Sarah Palin will track that might be moving in different directions. I think bring us together. We already have a model for audit committee. So I really appreciate the work that went this and I
think you'd be very helpful to have us all the table together. So this makes sense to I find this very refreshing and productive RF Pack
volunteers, they're so dedicated and they've done amazing work. And now that we >> have that kind of data that I mentioned earlier, we've got the stream to cities Committee. We've done a lot of
the work that of path was intended to help wit you know, did you know even the boundary policy really takes over that role? So, you know, the more the board can step up and to fill its policy responsibilities, the more
that we can be efficient, especially with how are very generous volunteers spend their time. I I I really appreciate that. We're going to use the audit committee model. We already know that
that works. I Because I know in the past it had been a bit time consuming to get RF fallen tears approved. So I like and it certainly would be
a lower volume. I would want to be sure. second sticks. Yes, I I think this is a great
idea. I wonder also about just checking with our public Engagement Committee of the board, right? Because they are the ones that oversee and help us ensure that we're utilizing
in maximizing our. Advisory committees. Right? And similar to when we sunset or Human Resources Advisory Committee. We want to make sure we're doing you know, respectful, thankful way. So just being up
front with pack members informing each board member like this is out there, you know, please contact. And so certainly giving our colleagues guidance on that I think would be helpful way in
advance of something coming to the board. So work with the chair of packed the Saint. John, cutting. >> To make sure that that's communicated fully and we can
do that. Question Okay. All cough of all in favor. It's unanimous. Thank you. Okay.
Next item a 0, 0, 5, I call on miss near in the Hunter Mill District Representative for report on the Joint Facility Review Committee all the way
back. And height beating. So you've got 52 minutes wonderful. Well, our meeting this morning is 22 minutes yes, it's hard to believe that
was only 2 days. So for the community, this committee, the Joint Facility Review Committee, was established in March by a board of Supervisors board matter. >> To help to then the mission
is to focus on budget efficiencies and savings are cost efficiencies and savings. And so that finally we kicked off today. So it's myself and Mr. McDaniel representing the
school board and on the county Board of Supervisors, it's supervisor and Vice Kathy Smith and Jimmy Biermann. So we met today and I we do have
a meeting link on our board docks that links to that mean documents. There's also a Web page now that the county is hosting for this Joint Facility Review Committee. >> So we can figure out how to
make sure that that's available to the to the public or just by searching. But, you know, we discussed the county shared some really fascinating
and helpful information that, you know, I later said this is the kind of stuff the whole board should know. And even training in onboarding is B, you know, again, kind of re envision our facilities work and how we're approaching it.
That looking at how the county looks at its capital improvement program and how they look at the general obligation bond program. You know, I learned things like libraries and parks are now in
a six-year cycle for bond funding. I thought it was still 4. The history of what the county has done in terms of contributing to a sinking
fund. So that's after the budget is done and their year-end contributing a certain percentage over to cover maintenance costs and that there had been unexpected amount for those maintenance
costs. And just over the last few years, it hadn't been, you know, just maintained and the school, the school division apparently was looking into doing its own sinking fund.
So, you know, just knowing how we're doing with our maintenance and that we have been having to use our general, the fund money, which is for instruction and the annual operations using that
money for maintenance is really not aligned with what we're trying to do with our annual instruction book fund. So I think there's there's a lot to learn there. And then
reading and I presented are ideas and talking about the nexus of all of this and that our schools are you 7 days a week. Half a million additional uses last year. All
this really helpful data that we've seen over the last year in saying we've got all be at the table together and not only the board of supervisors and county and the school division, but also the Park
Authority because we know even during some of our construction renovations. Now, there are these challenges with everything from parking lot access to athletics Really
looking at it with that one Fairfax Lens something that was was supported. So then we looked at potential topics, too. Have the staff focus on
lots of staff there, Mister Gordon and his team, Mr. New of our Chief Operations officer our CFO as well. So looking at topics and we explored a number of them to.
22. 32 was the first one. And there was a lot of agreement that that need to be explored more fully we talked about and we'll use member it is that understanding and share that, you know, there are a number
that are really critical to how we do business that R well due for review, including for school-age childcare, use of facilities. And, you know, that's a really big topic, especially as I said in the
Fairfax County Athletic Council for boarding hearing and learning so much again. And then just in general facilities, maintenance because it's become clear through the day to throughout
this year from our facilities team that well, funding might provided for Fcps manage facilities. CPS is bearing the costs of maintenance and
emergency maintenance and staffing. So really a great example is just recently with the stadium bathrooms. So our school board had approved the building us bathrooms at 15
high schools. Long, long awaited for and the permitting took a really long time. So that, again gets to that 20 to 30 to process and some other things you want to improve. But when the facilities were
finish at the start of the school year, there was an expectation that the school division was going to clean them. Keep them safe. Pay for utilities. And you know that
all costs money and that money is coming from our funding, which is for instruction. And so to the credit of the neighboring community services
team. They said, okay, like we understand, let's get our legal stuff together and our liability things and security and so they're working that out. So I'm hopeful that that trend can continue with a
whole host of other things because otherwise, it's a lot of I think, past disappointments. And we, you know, we're moving away from that. move into doing things
better for entire more efficient. So our next meeting, I think, is until December. So lots of time for the staff to work together and for us to continue developing.
But yeah, it was a really wonderful start. It was, you know, we have to do things differently. Some thought it was bad or wrong. It's just that we are in a different economic reality. So let's figure out the best way to go
forward and Mr. Do anything you want know. I think that was his very it Yeah, it was a very productive conversation with the Board of Supervisors.
The 2 representatives >> And the next meeting is December. 11th of this year. So looking forward. >> Also the same day acpd. See. So I guess this is what
it is. and okay over chances facilities all day long. Yes, December 11th of 2025. Is the next meeting of this
committee. So when you question, and we will send the materials to the board with their also posted online for
the public that you. With that are our next CDC meeting is on December 11. 2025 is a 7 o'clock here. Gatehouse Ministration or administration
center in 1600. The Fairfax County School Board Comprehensive Planning and Development Committee meeting is adjourned as of 05:45PM.
Thank