>> All right. Good afternoon. >> going to call the government's meeting for March. >> 18 2025 to order. Mystic's.
It has submitted a written request to attend this after his meeting virtually due to a medical conflict is attending today's meeting from Centreville, Virginia. All those in favor of approving
the sticks, its request. Dr. Anderson Aaron. Myself. All those in favor Sizemore Heizer. That's unanimous for
those in the room. The 6 a please check your audio and video. Mystic's it. All right.
Welcome back for that check. All I call on. Doctor Reed for item 1 to policy. 21 0, 8,
human Humana deficiency virus policy. >> Thank this lady. you know,
I think what we've provided hears a redlined version of the policy. There weren't very many changes made We do at the
end, talk about referring to the current version of the regulation. we also have the OSHA. 29. Guidance. Which is
on the back as illegal reference. And the current version of the regulations. So since this one was last
updated in 2011. I feel like pretty straightforward, honestly, in terms of its revisions. And I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank
you, Dr. Anderson. >> Yeah, very quickly out. Just make 2 quick statements that I think is my thinking across all of the policies. I
see this as I've said before, to be our communication to the public into the superintendent. So as such, I think we have to offer as much clarity to the public as possible and we could we could
achieve that by having clear headers and having Roman numerals because this is just kind of won big. lot of information. And I know we don't want a public too. You
know, parents have to search for it. So one, I would definitely advocate for us to have, you , Section one purpose because we have it on some, but not all of them. And I think that has to be
consistent and whatever the other subsequent sections are, but I don't want to spend all my time on that formatting issue. >> Secondly, I also want us to try to make these as quickly
as possible. And again, this will show up across the other policies that will handle, which is the board is communicating to the superintendent to give directions to create whatever it should be. The
superintendent or his or her designee, I think falling into the trap of identifying specific offices, make it an opportunity to have to redo the policies. If there's a we
organizational restructuring. And so that's the second. What I'd like for us to just be consistent. I don't want to say this across these other policies. And thirdly, I think we need to come to consensus
about the terms that we are utilizing PA families. We've been utilizing families caregivers, parents, some grouping of the 3 very often.
It's parents and caregivers. I'd like for us to figure out what is it that we're going to utilize and make that come across the entire well across all of our policies? So those
kind my big 3 overarching feedback points when it comes to this one, specifically, I have one question regarding the section that has
philosophy where it begins with in red evidence shows that risk and it goes on to speak to standard precautions entailed using gloves, stand up precautions, tell using
gloves, etc. That's good information. But that's not a philosophy. And if we want to keep it, I think you should live elsewhere, whether it's in some sort of procedure,
just something else because it doesn't come up. Cross has the philosophy comes across as either a definition or just some other title and I think
that is the bulk of what I had for this one. Thank you. So thank you. For the points
related to formatting and, you know, I I think if it's if it's minimal to the to the committee. >> think it
>> I think we can get through these but also. Possibly. Work on the for Manning. Consistency. Before we bring
him to the full board for the vote. And maybe that's some work that I can do offline with Dr Reid and team and then
I think the other thing was I do agree with consistency related to the terminology referencing in terms of parents. So I just put a border mystics that can't here. So that's something
technology going on. just want to apologize. Thank you. >> We'll fix that. Will pause there because I don't know that's a problem for the entire public. So let's pause
and check that. Can you hear us now?
>> Yes. Like Okay. Thank you. I think we caves and terminology around parent or caregiver. I just think we need to capture that and then
try to use that terminology when we moving forward. And again. make that a priority. Okay. I think next up was Miss
Mayor. This. Yes, the question about does the standard precautions entailed? Not that I belong in philosophy. If you
don't want in philosophy to get out of philosophy, right? It's simply a statement of fact. For the good the group.
I will read definition of philosophy. It says Frost is a systematic study of general and fundamental questions concerning topics like existence reason, knowledge, value, mind and language. In
theory, depending upon the definition. But part of that, something like that I think could live in philosophy I'll leave it at that. I will see
if others had the same question as Mayor. Yes. agree that shouldn't do formatting. I actually just sense to the
governance committee and clerks, the running document I've been keeping about. >> Formatting. And so it's gotten it. So it's got things like was actually not just for
mending, but it's talks about some things that are even accomplish like having a memo for the board and with that entail. But at the end, it's basically the style guide and really this good move over to
like the whole border at all of our communications. We want to make sure we talk about our governor spaniel in our motions and all those things. So just pertaining to parents and guardians. That's what used in the boundary policy
and grading policy. Parents and guardians. So I put that in that bucket of what we do. The final review. You know, we do those kinds of things. I mean, philosophy purpose. That's another one. So I
definitely am eager to figure that out, also eager to do the content work today. So I thought this policy was fined ago. My only comment was that perhaps there could be an
umbrella policy about blood borne illness under which HIV is included. I don't know if you have other policies about blood. Gordon illnesses or again. Is this a thing that
makes sense to roll into others? But for now, 2 have put, you know, our thoughts on it. I am. I'm fine with it. And I prefer this version.
Then to that, the SBA sample person. Do you want to respond
to that Bloodborne? Overriding? Do we have any other policies related to that? >> We have hygiene practices.
We have. Health services, school health related needs. I'm not aware. Of Bloodborne. Illness. Policy. That would be
We could write one, but not personally aware of what mean. guess the other thing that I'll add is that this policy >> you know, came about when AIDS was new, HIV was new
Wright. 1988. We don't have a policy just for COVID. You have a policy just for flu. So I think the discussion of the prior board had been is this
necessary if the question blood borne illness than that's, you know, a whole other bucket. But are we going to have a you can see the day when it started? So I think it's fine to do it now. I just
don't think it's really is. And really there could be more robust talk about blood borne illnesses or yeah. So that's my thinking in with the
previous board thought. So seeing no other placards. It sounds like really the only question was related to. >> Whether or not the one statement along that
philosophy >> my hand is based. Sorry, I look at their second ago. It was not a noun Mystics it. so I agree that the most mayor
and to that I wasn't as looking at it. I was like why this policies only for HIV even let like they have no other. >> You know, there are hundreds of other diseases are infectious diseases, which are
separate policy for each of them. And then I was looking at the list of all the do House and CDs and this kind of odd. like sitting ahead.
Should be like to help. I know bucket. So is there a reason that this is under the 2 thousands of There were others are still like in a similar in
nature. Why is this my question for Howie categorize them? I don't know. Can answer that. >> Well, I think it's categorized under health and
welfare. Okay. So. And under special services because that's the department that oversees health and welfare. So that's why it is there. I mean, doesn't mean it needs to
stay there, but that's where it currently sits. I mean, it doesn't make sense to be in the for
>> Again, I mean, does number sometimes, I guess don't make sense to how we have buckets of them together. if everybody's okay that that I'm
OK, but that I'm just is just solid, seeing all of them. And this was little bit toughest like it was different than all the other list of policy
discussing today. So that's that's all. Okay. So >> should we got an answer to
why it's in that you hundreds. It's under special services. It is health welfare. There are others that are special services that are in the 200's they could to hundreds as one
of the month with the most policies I'm comfortable. Bringing this to a vote. Seen other placards to just accepted from staff. Miss
Mayor. Okay. So and I know how much you want get through the continent. I do, too. But I do think taking some of this out is helpful at the outset. So I just Googled what are the
series of accounting numbers? >> What is the name of the 2000 series? Like what are the names of each of the series? I don't see them on our. Policy page like it's not to
thousands. Are this and because this is going to matter later, when we get to the policies that have been miss numbered for some reason. And I do think. Again, this
policy has created a time and a place. It would seem to make more sense to roll it into what makes sense now, which is blood borne illnesses in general. It doesn't seem
urgent that we pass it right now. I mean, if it's something, but I think it relates to what are the purpose of this series? And if it's health. Is there another category that's more health?
Do we have the list of series numbers? So in accordance with regulation, 11, 0, 4, the 2000 series special services. And
so it's anything from admissions. Residents attendance, counseling, services, health and welfare promotion, retention, grading and graduation requirements. >> Psychological services for students. social culture.
Sorry, I can't comprehend all that list where you reading regulation 11, 0, 4, and it lays out the title of each
series and then the subtitles that go series. Okay. I wish.
Regulation. 1, 1, 0, 4, This would have been great for us to. bling assigned. It's just
like these are the kinds of things that we think about refreshing this system. We
have to know exist. >> Well your street and yeah, I mean, this one I think is. This one I think is more
unique than the other ones. We want look at special services. I mean, that's also where we have special education right now. And some of us don't believe that special education should be a special services.
We feel like it should be an instructional services, but it continues to reside here. So like that's one thing. We've also got grading and graduation requirements and promotion and retention when
that's really I think should be under instruction. So I guess the question is, as we go through this exercise today, what are we willing to kind of put on the side for now? And what needs to be
decided? And this is just a tough one to start with. But it kind of lays bare. All of it. So I will defer to you, Madam because you've spent a lot of time framing this.
Well, I appreciate that. So I mean, I'm hearing having to thought isn't listening. One is we sunset this all together. Right? Do we need a
been born? You diseases sunset it all together. I mean, that's Sizemore Heizer. You can finish your thought. I was
going to raise my hand to say, I mean, I. I think it's kind our workers bucket in 2 ways, right? We're looking to try to catch up on some of these
policies, which I think the Super and ve done a great job of kind of some of these policies to catch up on. >> And then there's a need perhaps to re order. The
policies create a, you know, it's Templet for what the formatting looks like, right? I would personally at this point recommend that we. Right
now try to catch up on some of these policies and maybe create a task force of the governance committee members to come back with because I could this being. We ordered to better match organization that Dr Reid is even done in
summer of the leadership team and the work that each team is doing. But I would almost say let's put. And reordering this into a task force that can
come back and be a stand-alone governance meeting. But in the meantime, to get through some of these policies, let's maybe folk that would my suggestion on that. As far as something this I think. got to say this.
There's a lot of things changing right now with the change in. >> Government. And I be sunset anything without seeing how things play out. Would be my
thought on that, especially things that were controversial at some point could seem like things that. Mistress come back around. I would just leave it at that. So I would not because Wilson setting it
at this moment. But I do think perhaps a task force to kind of work on some of those things and into a standalone governments meeting might be good in them that they can go back and we order those in that. But right now I'd like to kind of for personal for
me, get through some of this backlog. That's my $0.2.
Well, I'd like to make a motion to adopt the proposed changes of policy number. 21. 0, 8 that
21. 0, it. Check to speak your motion. >> Doctor, >> thank you, sir. I think that at this time we can
update it. And as we discussed, we will continue to figure out overall framework of our policies. Great discussion. Thank you. Besides Pfizer's like to speak your
second. No, I'm good. Thank Yet just a quick question. And I'm not sure if that's the same question Mystics it had asked. >> The hygiene practices. 44,
15, it's just made me wonder because I was having the same thoughts. Should this be sunset? I have not looked at 44 15, but I wonder if that would be better to live under
there as well. >> so I didn't fall that 44
15. Madam Clerk, can you tell me what the 400 series is?
Human resources? I don't have that policy in front of me. Is hygiene practices? Is that
related to? Employees? Likely if it sent us this I could look at happen, confirm that. That would be my guess. That's my guess. Which news they don't. They don't go together
right there. There. Exclusively separate things seeing no other placards. Call
the question. Okay. All those in favor of adopting this as written. Please raise your hand. Sizemore Heizer Dr Anderson. I'm going to f***
Miss Mayor. >> His digs in myself. I think I have tears of joy. ♪
Before we move on. I will say this, you know, and this is what I what I don't know right? If we were to. Have a task force and we're look at
numbering. We were looked at naming because we came across this in grading where we wanted to change. >> The beheadings rate I guess any change like that would
then have to still come back for a vote even if we move something to a different number. Because we found maybe
we need more you know, you know, maybe to 1200 series. I do now. I think these are all good questions. But I do think for the good the group, it's nice that we can get through
some and then revisit with a task for some formatting. I mean, I'm be honest. I'm not averse to using even, you know, I in some ways too
create the structure. We won't I want that structure is and try to expedite like so it's not manpower. The machine
power. We're going to move on to. 3, 1 dot 0, 3, which
should be. On the agenda agenda item. 1 dot. '03. Which is the policy. 21 15 child abuse reporting procedures and
I'll call him back to read again. >> Thank you. Miss again, in particular policy, there were
some clarification around reporting obligations. But beyond that, really and the code of Virginia adjustment
numbers as well as current versions of other policies. But these are minimal amendments based on you know,
change know. >> Numbering. >> Thank you. As Mayor. >> Yeah, I. >> I would make a motion to
approve it. hold on that. So this was one as Dr. Anderson knows that I worked on personally was like one of the first policies we had and we really worked hard to make it
super clear what the steps were if a staff member or someone suspected child abuse. Since then, we've done a lot of discussion and workarounds.
Putting the processes of work into regulation. So I would be comfortable passing this today in the vein of we're trying to make sure that it's still relevant, incorrect, but I
would put a note on this as when we define what is policy and what is regulation. I think this needs to be reassessed. And so I also wonder like I'm I'm putting
notes on my notes today on all right. We pass this polity and policy in. These are the returning questions and and I'll so I'll stop there. But I do think that the content is
relevant, but I would also like to hear to I guess the superintendent agrees. But the content being correct. I do.
The content is correct. It is regulation ish because these are procedures. >> But that's what's currently sitting there. you know, if you provide me direction, that
would just want a purpose and a philosophy. And then refer to regulation. We certainly can do that. I do think because this particular topic can lead to dismissal for
staff members and there's a legal mandate. It an important policy not to say other policies aren't important, but I'm happy to go either way on
it. But this is what we revised given where it sits at
the moment. Dr Anderson. Thank you. I also just looking at this, I'm like this is fairly straightforward. And, you
know, my other description stands with let's identify of the buckets. >> We have to say where the purposes cetera and my initial thought was this is very much
a regulation, particularly part C. And then when I look up the regulation, 21 25, it's actually depict a tip. And I know we're trying to get through it. But I also know we
need to fix some of the things while we may not have outlined fully, you know, the regulations and the policies. I also cognizant that some
policies a way to scant like they don't communicate anything. I think we can communicate what the board is looking for out of this
reporting without the how to which already lives in the regulation. We could take the time to do it now or we could not. But it's going to be a point that continue to be a
sticking point with. I don't know with many others, but definitely this one. My part C is almost verbatim. 1, 2, 3, looking at the regulation and
that's almost exactly the same thing. So is a point occasion they're too scared to seize. There is the big ABC's Underreported procedures you're from. But that's E on
which would be a on H 2. Yes, on page 2 reporting procedures. >> Letter, sea and one to 3. It's exactly the language of the regulation. And I don't think we need to have that defecation.
>> I see space for that part go that whole section. See everything else could stand and not have it be a big deal. But that's the really all of the procedures which we do not
mind here. Thank you for that. Mystic's. It. >> I wanted to ask why did we
change the added the line, official capacity Mr. Roy Foster, Dr Reid just visit the language to be added to be complying something.
>> And it's where are you referencing? >> And the line version of this or official capacity.
Thank you. The commission, the fast well, I mean, >> let's see here. So what it
did say it was all of CPS employees. Who in their profession. Of reason. I'm not
sure why the end of that phrase, Jon, do you have a sense of why we would have added in their professional or official capacity? >> I my
>> assessment is that that change is. >> Based drawing the line between what fcps employees
information they obtain while they're at work said here is under professional official capacity and what they may come into in a private capacity when they're, you know, not. At working, right
and not acting within the scope of employment. But you know, we may nto follow up with. The. Policy. Consultant
who has been working on these revisions. >> Yeah, I'm personally not in favor off this edition because when you are mandated to
report child abuse. It is it's becomes a part of like you do and I'm Amanda did abuse supporter of site abuse. As in
my organization, which I am doing at CBS. But it doesn't mean that if I'm an FCPA is an icy child abuse. I mean, not
report it because I'm not an official capacity was not in
the policy before. So it's added. So that's what I'm trying to understand. Maybe there was a reason it has added. I think there was it, Jon. so I had a chance to plug
Virginia code section that is quoted in the Red line. 63.2 dash 15, 0, 9, >> And that language referring referencing, professional or official capacity comes
directly from. The language of that code section. >> As a point of reference, it's also the bsp sample policy that was also included
in your documents. I do think to your point Mistick there are many of us. >> For example, hourly employees myself that we're
not on a particular. I mean, like it's 24, 7, right? If I become aware, Mr. Foster, Mr. Lambert, if we become aware, we must report. So I understand your point, but it
is interesting that the code is this explicit, but it doesn't necessarily mean that for folks who are in many positions in the division. I mean, if you're aware of it,
you do. We are mandatory reporters. Mostly, I don't know. But the I just feel like if you're of Diane abuse
doesn't matter what best you are. >> You've got you know, you reported. And so and I did see the view as being a sample
policy to they some additional things which we don't have year. Good job could be added, I guess so. fine. if everybody's okay, but had to
keeping you, Don, I and disposed lean Okay that and down. There's line in Bisbee policies as including any child who may be abandoned in
the reporting requirement. I just want know if the they could add that are are recovering in an anyway. This,
including including any child who may be abandoned. >> I think that's >> in the reporting obligation requirements that would be
neglect. >> Abandoned gives it a much different feel for sure than.
Neglect. >> So are you suggesting then in under the description? The
second line us is child abuse and neglect us a child child abuse. Coming to collect comment and abandonment. Yeah, sure. Okay. We have a second
for that friendly amendment. Clerks of the capture that. Tenant Mystics it.
>> Yes, ma'am. For now, I'm good at this. I just want support the policy as if it says in their face professional official capacity. But that's just me
personally. I am amended border child abuse and organization. So I think that is that all of But I go because I'm a no fish ill of
again. may be different for employees, but that's that that's that's a storm. Just my personal opinion. Not that it is wrong. >> Yeah, I think it was
clarified that it's codified in the code. So I think the parties that was actually I can tell you that I think at every single person who works with in this industry finds himself mandatory reporters.
24 7. This is an FCS policy as Mayor. done. >> We I don't think should have a habit of changing things because one board member has an opinion. This is
how we get into trouble. I'm looking at the document now and the legal references that are slated there an the end of the draft. I don't see it. The title of the actual
code is that see that something that staff should be recommending? So when I look at the transmittal memo, all it says is the policy was reviewed and updated by the office of the chief academic
officer. Staff. But why write a better explanation would have been. This is updated to
reflect state code about this we were just talking about how it's kind of HR related. So it's interesting that it's achieved academic officer. So.
You know, again, I think we got to be really laser focused on what we're trying to do right now and not add in stuff off the top of our heads. I think that something can we ask a question about it and
come back and verify that it reflects it nears the state code and also as a format should at the bottom of the policy include the title of the state, could I don't know, but I am not in favor of just
adding things that on the fly right now. This is clarification are you talking about the word abandonment? I am okay, thank you. So I don't
support the motion. Dr. Anderson. Stephen said this is a question for you just again, just to wrap my mind around how this is going to be
interpreted if we write official capacity or professional capacity, I'm so sorry that chair is cutting off your face right at the position of under your
eyebrows. There if employee were to be in a grocery store was witness to something that happened and did not report that. Would that be considered
not in their official capacity and would not be subjected to some of the other things that are outlined in this policy. >> I mean, I would need
deeper. Look at that. I will say my immediate thought is that it would not apply because employee in the grocery store is not in the grocery store in their official capacity there by in
their personal capacity due to personal grocery shopping. >> That is, of course, that minimum statutory compliance separate and apart from what
the right thing to >> thank you for that. And then I'll have another motion. But I way for this one to
finish. Sizemore Heizer. So just to clarify motion on the tables only the band and pars not to take away the phrase a house as Make sure not missing
that >> us a separate motion that comes on the official capacity Section is staying in the policy yeah, I just saw that it merits state code is what
what I saw. my question is more on the word immediately. And I know state code also uses the word immediately. >> But when we don't define it and it makes it more difficult
to enforce. And I sort anecdotally been told 24 hours is consider the immediately. But I'm wondering it for the we need to specify the policy or maybe in the regulation.
What immediately mean? So that's that was my question. I believe that's listed in the policy and or Penalties D on page 2.
>> And I believe that's also in the regulation. That's what else you can be further up. It
seems odd to have in that spot. >> But it's in the look at responding Want to make sure things that the code only the
media without defining it. Because me within 24 hours and a penalty doesn't really make immediately clear something can be good to put that for
the up. And so it's a thing within 24 hours. We're just we
talk about Virginia law requires. It doesn't to me. I think the reason why that didn't jump out to me that talks about Virginia law does with 24 hours. It doesn't talk about our immediately, right?
Because there's internal. You know, consequences as well for not reporting. And so I think we need to make it clear that that 20 fires also applies to our internal, not just Virginia state law. That my
$0.2. I would I would Happ's, you know, ask you out of here, regulation, Dre to take a look at the regulation or add to the front where it says immediately almost, you know,
most immediately, you know, within 24 hours. We're not making a motion post asking, take a look at The regulation trying to find the word
immediately. So H page one, it's under and the red Line reporting OSHA and the robot telling Yeah, I would almost a show within 24 hours. When I
read that under penalties and I looked at where the state penalties as opposed to our penalties. So I'm not making a motion at latest. Is that
something Dr reviewed? Consider the regulation. That seems like long and
regulation. This mayor, we're still I think talking about adding neglect, adding abandoned abandonment. So 2 things. And this is the
learning process that we're doing is we're getting better at the superintendent giving us the analysis for policy. >> Definitely, you know, there's a certain definition of abandonment. And so we've got to understand, you know,
is this just that how it relates to code? But also the penalties peas. And I think when you're reading these, I would like your recommendation
on like this section could be moved to regulation or this section should include a 24 hour. You know, like. I think
that would be good for the teacher. So and I don't know how comfortable I am basing it up right now. Further and we have other ones, too. I don't I just want to share. Dr.
Anderson. I have a motion, but we have one on the table. So I wanted to wait for this to be dealt with. First.
>> saw your packing up. to the side, a Mystic's it. >> I just want to see that the board amended man came from the vs Ba want see it was not
something I just talked fit all of my own. it it just say is that on the reporting and also in the the If you look at the V S B it's just it's a
basement What they have bandits, it's it's a dress. Their soul. I as we're trying to like information from there and make our policy more line
but not some of the VSP a policy as well. That's the reason I mention that word abandoned because used in that
SBA policy. and I'm thinking about this. of professional official get Rusty. I feel like it is getting more office tent of It's coming from a
faceoff. Getting power are empowered. The school employee. That began departed without the fear off you know,
any kind action against them, because so it's not bad. Sosa said the friendly how it's of it. And okay. So I good that
that now so I wanted to married. They find that I got a wreath at that I think is just getting more power to employees to that, to be able to report it. And it's not
that they cannot reported today grocery store they can. This in their official capacity. So main event, I
will it stay I find that Kamber, they have the want to forward. Thank you, Miss Mayor. I appreciate the reference to the VSP a sample
policy and I just looked it up and only says child abuse and neglect reporting. >> So again, my dentist wanting to not create words that have certain legal
meetings. Abandonment is not in. >> The the SBA that one that starts with GA the dash child
abuse and neglect reporting. >> Is that it says abandon. >> And for those, if you're looking at the sample policy in a notice, reporting
requirement DOT and one, it's the 3rd line be abandoned. Putting any child who may be abandoned. it. It's embedded in the sample policy. >> in the document that Ga E
dash child abuse and neglect reporting yet. Look at the title right there. Just Tony, where she said the word abandonment, us. Yeah. But again, the phrase used
throughout, though. I mean, that's kind of. Not clear on that part. It's abused and neglect, abuse and neglect in. The section at the bottom of
page. One is abuse and neglect. So I just want to try and keep it as similar to the models as we have to keep us
out confusion. I'd like to call the question. Okay. So right now what's on but voting
on right this minute is the addition of the word abandonment and the description word says in compliance with the Code of Virginia section. 63 DOT 2 Dash 1503, 15, 29 child abuse,
comma, neglect and abandonment. All those in favor of the way it's written. of the weight shown on the screen with the at it about of
adding the word if you're in favor of adding the word abandonment rate your hand. Sizemore Heizer Dr Anderson. Mystic's all opposed. This
mayor and myself. Passes 3 to 2. Dr Anderson.
>> Yes, I would like to motion for us to remove Section. >> SI SI essentially under reporting procedures section.
See that says where and home to report numbers. 1, 2, 3, >> The reason is this is exactly in V regulation.
Everything else should stand. I'll second that. If I'm allowed to. Doctors like to
speak to motion. I think I said I should said it. But it's it's gonna clarity which >> It's Section C. Want bring
late in city. Which would then make penalties the new C. >> And immunity it. What? >> the new scene because if
you look at the how it is you are correct. Your corrected my mistake, my mistake, it would just be removal thinking. I also do want to say. It has to be ordered. We can't have see. And then a subsection is also a letter. It has to be a
number. >> Right? Something's funky here. The item is. They're
section yes, actually, aces description be says reporting see, says reporting procedures. The facts are the first obligation. The climate and then reporting procedures
has reporting obligations be confidentiality. See when home to report, which is like the how. And it's exactly the same
language in regulation. Sizemore Heizer. >> I just wanted to ask staff perhaps with their thoughts about removing this section
from the policy. >> Dr reader, Mr. Foster. >> I E the. >> Where and whom to report?
Yeah, honestly the reporting procedures period could probably all sit in regulation because they are procedures.
So comfortable. I think everything in C. Point C isn't So, you know, I I'm fine. Putting it in regulation. This
aligns the regulation cited which it is really see. Point A point B are also probably and regulations are all procedures. But I'm fine with
removing see Point C. >> just think that was curious why it wasn't suggested to be removed and you may not know what was Yeah, I just it's. >> I think what I'm trying to
do, we've been asking folks to work on these policies is. Some of these policies have been policies for very long time. In this case, this one
since 1986. So. For some reason, the board for the last. What 45 years has seen not be 45 years ago. Well, 86
would be not 5 but 40 years ago that this I mean, I know and I don't know how much of it was or wasn't the here wasn't wasn't con. So I'm trying to both be respectful
to the work that I've been hurted and the updated with legal references and where appropriate philosophy tweaks here. And there. If you're
asking me to full-on, say, do I think all of this being a policy? Probably not. But again, I you know, I know how far you want. U.S. are like 70
loose with printing shares in the backyard and some bushes. Amanda trim. I just it's none of this is wrong. It's not inaccurate. It's not going to
cause confusion. It's just legally updating the policy was that's was trying to make sure we could just move through these policies, make sure they're legally appropriate. Better frame
them. And I think we can do some formatting. This mayor asthma spans pointed out that or is more consistent, but just getting us on a path of. Maybe a little more 18. And that's why just want to make sure that wasn't some reason
that I didn't think about to have this in here. But if his nephew. >> There's no reason your but I'm fine. Removing in. That was my main reason for asking
yes, ma'am. Dr. Anderson. Yes, just more of a quick comment. I know when looking for as much information from staff as possible and that's important. And we should have that.
>> But we also have the work of working through these policies. So I don't want us to get ourselves too much into a corner to not give ourselves the flexibility because the policies they're based in
regulations and codes, cetera. But it is still the board's communication to staff and to the public. I hope we don't
lose sight of that. >> Okay. I'm gonna call the question. So. Before you is
the elimination of CC in its entirety because it is completely duplicative in the regulation verbatim. So those in favor of moving removing CC, please raise your hand.
This mayor Dr Anderson, Miss Sizemore Heizer. Mystic's it in myself. So we will remove CC. So if I because it is, I
think an easy fix in terms of formatting. I'd like to make a motion that that description be changed to Roman Numeral one. Reporting the change from
being Roman Numeral 2 reporting procedures be
changed to Roman Numeral 3. And then penalties. change to
Roman Numeral for. Immunity to 5 in retaliation to 6. Because most of these policies
purposes, Roman world, one. So if we could just have the purpose bureau, minimal one and then just move everything down. But I have no objections to what you've just outlined.
It's almost you could almost miss it. I don't see purpose. Yeah, it's oh, I see you're saying. Make that and remember one and then bounce everything. Okay. That's fine.
Which means we go 1, 2, 3, 4, on on Page one. Get to the back where Roman Numeral 5, 6,
7, Any comments on that? Reporting procedures that see becomes 3. I'm sorry that see
becomes for because we added from a number one as purpose.
Immunity. 6 retaliation, 7. I believe that's reflected on
the screen by the clerks. Seeing no hands or placards. We bring that for a question. Everyone in favor of what you
see on the screen with those at its as we just indicated, please raise your hand. But lady who was a second. That Dr Anderson. Doesn't favor this
mayor and Dr. Anderson, the Sizemore Heizer Mystic's it myself. That pass since. Any
other comments on this policy. Now we'll bring the entire policy to a vote. Those in favor of the policy as reflected with the 2 friendly
amendments. Please raise your hand, Miss Mayor and Dr. Anderson, Miss Sizemore Heizer Mystics it myself. Right. Now.
Con Dr Reid. Agenda item 1 dot. '04. Policy to 2 to 0 mission and graduate misleading, who second it that we're voting on the policy as
amended who was moving in second, didn't. >> Dr Anderson. Thomas Mair was moving Dr. Anderson was seconded. Okay. Sure. Dr.
Readmissions of post graduate students. Yes, ma'am. >> this is a fairly straight forwpolicy, which I don't
believe we made any changes to so we're just bringing it has
a review there you have it. >> I think doctor Anderson. It's quick. Just one question.
I'm trying to understand >> it says under under what circumstances would we need to have that mission of post graduate students? Are we
talking about students who are allowed to be now system beyond age of. 21 be on age of 18 or is this a student who
was fully graduated? I'm not grasping. What we're doing here fully. This is a student, I believe, who is fully graduated.
>> And that could be either it from Fairfax County School or from a school outside of counor from a school in another's state. But this is
somebody who is fully graduated. And is a post-graduate student. And what would they do? Like what
I saying it would be similar to an audit of the class. I have not since I've been here. This is year 3 been. Have ever
never enacted this policy. my knowledge, no one's made that request. And but if I'm question for Mr, Foster, because you may have some
insight as a counselor, but just one more question. foster is there code that is related to this policy? What does it say in the code of Virginia?
The section that has referred here? What exactly does it entail? >> And I'm checking. I would ask can circle back to you. Hopefully momentarily, we're
policy. Looks like 20 to 20. >> So while you look that up, I would love some insight from our resident counselor. If you have some. I'm trying to figure out the circumstances
under which this would occur. >> I'm going to work on that. I'm thinking this could be step Davis. Some of the transitional programs we talked about. feel like
there's been occasions where we've had students actually had earned their diploma, who participated in step. But I'm it's it is okay because that's what so that I don't.
>> Because you see that you stay through the age and ready receive it at that time. But this is a fully graduate student. I don't understand the parameters.
>> It will say that we on occasion in a prior life would have somebody who perhaps was here on a rotary Exchange program or some type of junior
State Department exchange who would have been fully graduated was not an exchange student but may come to attend several classes at a high
school space permitting maybe for a quarter or something. It's not a wouldn't be connected to credit. Again. I
have not been asked that here, I have experienced sort of these unusual exceptions and really with this creates is
the possibility upon principal recommendation and approval of the division superintendent. Should that. The currents of eyes. Dr. Answer you. I guess
my last piece is this a fossil when he has it? It does reference a Virginia code of
Virginia 20 to 1, 3, 5, >> You miss Mayor. Okay. So this is an example of where.
We need the rationale, Dr. If you're saying you've never encountered this well in 3 years here, but I have in my prior work. Well, I'd like to
know why. And we have a policy that does preferences. Foreign exchange students in the graduation policy. I just got
to be more robust in this. The reference to the state code. I had no idea why we have this policy. And if you can't tell me, I don't think we should have it with evidence. You
know, why is it needed where the circumstances arises from? We got a call it these policies out that are, you know, this almost 10 years
old. So that's what I'd like to see is as we go forward otherwise, I just again, I el like I'm making stuff up.
With no practice to based on. And I do think perhaps having a form for the memo that says like is there a the SBA simple policy? What's the VA code like? So we know that we're
checking off all the things, you know, has the superintendent seen this in practice? Otherwise we're going spend time asking these questions here. Right? not
every it necessarily going to see in practice every Even every 3 years. I just I don't know what exceptions the specifically spoke to. I can only speak to what.
>> Exceptions like this I've dealt with, which I've already described that you know, I this was written originally in 1986. Again, that seems to be a year. A lot of these were
written and I don't know what issue they were addressing. >> So >> I do think again, this is the first time are trying this new review format out. If you think that things are not
relevant and I would really like to know. It doesn't make sense on its face and how we would use this. So I just we were in need more of your recommendation if we're really
going to start calling out things that are no wonder really relevant. So. So I think Mr. Foster's researching
the code that's referenced. Is that correct? Mr. Foster. >> That's correct. So can we move on to the next policy and just move this one to the back at the moment? But folks, okay
with that. Mystic's it. >> looking at that. But I do want to add some question mine. Okay, go ahead and add your questions now. It just
me. I wanted to know if there is a military family use. of that showed that China's already the trial to create in their other country. But then they want to have the Macon
graduation. They want to finish the school high school here as well. But with this one, allow them because they're not foreign exchange students either Dr. Family of
military family. I could. 10 and family. So I want to say that this is that those kind of cases there, not for just ordered by U American citizen just coming back to make our
foreign service, you know, State Department families like I'm just that's my question.
I'm not sure if that being if. I guess they would be post graduate if they do to graduated, but they wouldn't be. I don't believe this.
Policy enables further credit or a new diploma that would be covered under I believe. Regulation around diploma and graduation. This is really would they be allowed to
attend high school if space permitted. And I'm guessing there must have been some exceptions. Again, I go back to maybe it's a military student who wants to just a 10
to meet. I like I don't or it's somebody who's come. He's already graduated from another country who maybe wants to attend school. Again. I just don't I don't have a good
sense of the history here. So I don't know what we used to farm trying to pull up the regulation right now to figure out if that gives me a quote here. >> So countries and the cleat
as the college graduation, some countries. And so not everybody is doing K 12. it could be that they finished 10th grade. So just find the
trying to find a reason of this policy. And that's what asking those clarifying questions on. It doesn't serve the purpose. I give it. It will be sunset like, you know,
leaks. But I'm just thinking maybe there we shouldn't do that in haste. This
♪ Sizemore Heizer. What I recommend is. Happy accommodate earlier but not want to do things could I don't know why year at this.
That's very good questions. But right here, not that. >> I rather either put this aside about next time or positive. Bring it back because I don't want to assume. That there is there is
not a reason for it You know, if there's it documents, dozen or previous division, perhaps there is something that's been implemented here before 3 years ago that we weren't aware of. I can think of maybe
somebody coming from a different country who earned a diplomat the of the 10th grade there but wants to go through 12th grade here. I like maybe the country has different requirements for a diploma and
they've technically graduate high school there. But there may be other requirements they want to hear or learn English. Just just think of reasons why it might be valuable. And I don't want to. Not pass something or get rid of it
when there might be reason. So. Dr Reid time meeting the rent regulation. >> And the regulation under requirements. As on the recommendation of the principal with the approval of
the division Superintendent Postgraduate students may be admitted to enroll in a specific high school course in Fairfax County. Public schools that leads to a professional license or credential. It was
here. She was enrolled and made satisfactory progress in the academic year. Immediately preceding the Post graduate experience. So that's what it
looks like. So applications for post graduate enrollment or do prior to the start of the school year immediately following graduation, those requests are considered on a space available basis. So it
looks like >> so I feel like in my tenure, Chantal and may have had somebody who did this in one of our courses. That they didn't get to level 3, for
example. And because there is room they were allowed to come and sort of. Sit through that course for certification purposes for that test. But not, but they already
graduated. So I think that's probably what the references in the regulation also talks about tuition paying. >> Here's a collection of to a strain that goes along with
this. Thank you. That freshman memory. >> did you find anything you want to share?
>> So the Virginia code sections, thank you that are referenced TWENTY-TWO 0.1 Dash 5 22.1 dash 6 are silent down to this level of detail that
we've been talking about with a push graduate student. They They also don't expressly prohibited. >> So there's no reference. >> Not that I could How are we
making it illegal reference? >> I think completely silent on the matter. I don't know. I mean, I think this policy has been in place, as I understand
it. And it 6 area yeah. Well, one, I think we need to strike the legal reference because none seem to exist as purpose to foster. From this document
because it's not such. I will say that there was also language in 22 point, any one dash 5 that contemplate or
authorize students up to age. 22 being enrolled. >> And so I think that is something that could be pointed to, you know, that would authorize this lady
outlined a moment ago. >> want this city to age. This speaks to having already obtained. A diploma. And returning. But you're saying
there's nothing that speaks specifically to. To that in the code that you able to find. I mean, I'm not going to stand on a hill on this. I just want to understand why
this exists, but it does concern me that we have a legal reference that is not really legal reference. So I think there's some opportunity for us to consider striking
that. I'm gonna ask a quick question. >> In the regulation, Dr Reid, is it reference up to the age of 22 because then that would in turn a line with the legal
reference, which is up till the age of 22. >> I didn't see that in what I read. I what I read >> was it was only available
in the year immediately following graduation. So I'm guessing if somebody was 21 in the immediate year after of wood. But if they were 18, the meteor after obviously would be 19. Right? So I think it
was more. So the immediate you're after, but we will check So just as a point of clarification, Doctor, Anderson, are you asking to
strike that? >> I am because that's not because as the Faso says, it doesn't speak to obtaining a postgraduate degree just which
regulation another policy about. Is anyone does or second for that. I am not
seeing a second. So. OK? So 2 things may be a story. This is my eyes as as I agree that perhaps we should. mean, this is a great discussion to have,
right. And so we've had it. And now maybe we set this aside so that can reflect on it and see where some of on gaps are. I also did look back
for the minutes and this policy, the for this back it goes is that the Bor docks goes back to 2004. I don't know how to obtain previous
minutes. They're probably in paper somewhere. It hope. But that 2008 1 says there was no change. So that also had to be thinking when we do review
policies in the future and this policy, if you look at the bottom of it now it's as adopted revised reviewed. So I have to think that the last time it was revised was
actually 2003. But we could be clear with their language going forward and actually put like was chain, you know, change or revise this. We we know at least so really I
would I would prefer to put this aside for now. It's been a good discussion, but clearly we've learned some things. And I want to pass something until know is that they really why
we need it. So. So it's clarification. Are you suggesting that Dr Reid come back with further information about why we need it? It wouldn't be my top priority.
But I think it's needed. think they can explain why it's needed. Having read the regulation again, I just haven't read it. I wasn't prepping necessarily for this one. >> But I think it's if
somebody, for example, is looking to finish a credential and they graduate like this spring. It gives them the ability if they apply to do it and there's room and the
principal recommends it that they can be a tuition paying student who finished a course that would lead to a license. I'm thinking auto body may be
mechanics, maybe firefighting. I don't know what things would lead to an absolute credential or license, but it gives that student that next year and only that next year to complete that. So that's the
purpose for it. And when you go to the regulation, there's actually a form to fill out I request one wrong that requires, you know,
information, the principal to recommend superintendent to >> review and so forth. What's the date on that form?
6/6/2018? So I certainly don't want to remove any policy because we don't know the implications that I also wonder is this something that should go in our adult Ed
program? I mean, we're talking about having adult in with the general Ed student population. Seems like there's some safety issues. You know, I feel like and should this be in another
place like in our career in tech or again, this is like one of those things and maybe this little paragraph can live somewhere else and being instead of being one Santa one policy, especially since there's no link to code. But I
also would suggest that when we do review policies that the regulations are also reviewed at that time. That's your, you know, around Dr Reid. But I
wonder about I don't have no idea the status of the regulations of and anyway. Well, the regulation I won't address regulation told the policy's been changed.
>> In the policy drives, then my work with staff to change regulation. I wouldn't change the regulation ahead of. And improve policy? No, I agree. But I'm thinking just as a
matter of how we get the full picture of the implications of this policy. >> You know, I don't want to change something. And then all of a sudden now forms are defunct and people can get stuff in. I think it when we
review these things these older ones that were not as familiar with, it will be important to think through Lake House is actually happening in practice. Now. So that's what I was talking
about. capture everything was at a motion to. That was at a motion that would make a motion to set this aside for now until it pause. I wasn't
motion to latest on the table. It's a criminally. That's in addition speak to it. Is there a second to that? Sizemore
Heizer. Okay. Like speak your motion. I'm even up for voting on it again. At the end of the meeting to see if you want to direct the superintendent. But let's see where we again. I don't know that the since the
Super hasn't seen in 3 years. I don't think this is the top of our agency list. Sizemore Heizer is like to speak your second. >> No, just think we from
Ation about this. So I'm happy to take this up and I'd like to get to the other policies. And other comments on the motion on the table. >> Could get some clarity on
what other information we need for it when they bring it back. >> I think just situations can
be Houston. More than what shared already. Just a point of order. The motion is to laid on the table. It's not directing the superintendent to continue work on it at this
time. The 2 different actions. So it's just asking colleagues to put this aside for now. Any other comments on the current
motion to put this asifor now? I my second that the guy answers. I have. Okay. So now does anyone want to second
putting this on the table? Not seeing any. We're back to discussion about the policy. Any comments on the policy
Sizemore Heizer. Led the call for a vote to adopt the policy. Okay. Hold up. I may have jumped ahead of this man punching a comment. Okay.
second call for the vote. Second. We'll call for the vote. All those in favor of adopting the policy as it
exists and he's written. That's the question right? All those in favor. Raise your hand. Dr. Anderson, Miss
Sizemore Heizer Mystics and myself. The policy passes. At least it will go to. Did you
get that? I don't think anybody actually have reported on that. People. The motion. She withdrew. That was not end of the motion to move the
policy as amended. I don't know that anybody actually ever made that motion. >> Okay. Right. Okay. Okay.
That's a point of order isn't an option for the chair to say without objection, we move this forward. There was an objection this time. But yes,
she can do that. she wants to do is out with a new Okay. So that was a vote to call the question and then we need to call the question. Okay, we're
gonna move on. Thank you. It was not unanimous right? But
mayor to post. All right. We are now on to 1.5 governments item student attendance at school. But prior to that, as mayor, did you want to make a
call? I just, you know me. I love my format of my process and I'm writing down all these things about, you know what the process should look like. And I'm just kind of confused because we've had comments that we don't want to act on things. We don't fully
understand. >> But we just passed this policy through and there were questions unanswered. Like I just feel like there's not a consistent rubric that our board members are using. I
think we should think about it. Maybe for the next round. We just passed a policy that has a legal code that doesn't exist. But I heard one member
say that that is problematic, but we passed it so. How do we get colleagues? How do we get to consistency? Because I want to try and collaborate and build consensus, but I can't
do that. If people's opinions change on how they decide on things from policy to policy.
Sizemore Heizer. Dr. Anderson. >> Yes, as the board member who raise the concern about legal can even get a second for us to discuss it. So I figured it's not an issue with that for everybody else. And
frankly, I needed to understand why this policy exists. >> But at end, I think I got that Ish and frankly, since no
one thought the legal reference was not a problem. >> I had to let it go. >> That's not I didn't vote because I didn't think It was going to satisfy man enough to
vote on it. So. Again, when we use as an option to learn about how we're going to continue through this just comment. The reason I didn't second, it is because I do
think that the reference to the age does lay within this, which is why didn't want to get it right. But as a legal reference and I was satisfied because I recollected that I had a similar situation when I
was a director where we use this policy first student to get a professional certification. Back to Doctor Reed and the next policy. 22
32 student attendance in school. >> Thank you, Miss Lady. Again, we really think we elaborated a bit. Staff did on
purpose and then clarified language around attendance. Unexcused absences. Added some
couple new sections. And then the current version of policy 26, 0, one policy. 33 30
around drivers, education. So happy to take any questions. >> I think most parents Parker
was first. I do. So I think this is a really good example of how we can make a meteor policy because we've had so much work recently around how important attendance is. And
that's not reflected at all really in You just so I see that there's a second second and 3rd sentence at the top.
But we know like the chronic absenteeism and how important it is. And that's part of that philosophy. Purpose thing. So I do think that way more needs
to be added into that I also think, you know, illness, medical procedures could be in like the scene catchall, as you know, mental health
conditions, military visit. I think we need to write that in a way that addresses all the ways in which student could be excused for that like it's a visit of, you know, family member of the military recent
return of someone deployed. so maybe some the can unrelated to the deployment or visit from a family member serving military duty. That would be something more specific. The definition of an excuse
absence actually is not accurate. saying it. Yet does not have prior knowledge. And that's not true. Unexcused absences when you're doing
something that's not like medical or family related, it's going on vacation or I don't know. Maybe it's even going if you're an athlete going to meet. I don't really know. But it certainly doesn't say that there dismissal
precautions. I think that it needs to be clear that we're talking about students physically departing school, not being like dismissed from the school system. The writing is also we're there's double
negative unclear. Also alternative secondary schools, attendance procedures like these instructional programs I don't under. I've never really heard that phrase. So I think
this needs more work and to definitely infuse the vision of the board about student attendance. So I would be in support of sending it back to the superintendent for another
round. Is that a motion? yet. Not yet. Okay. Thank you. All I'm not sure who was second. I think it was actually okay. Dr
Anderson. Okay. I think this looked at my notes so I won't in the middle of the room. I think this is a lot of work. And again, I take very seriously that these policies serve 2 purposes, one for the
board to communicate to the superintendent, which means we need to infuse something a little bit be fear into the purpose, which is up to us to do and not looking for staff
to do that. So I'd like to make sure and this conversation that we're highlighting what those things are. And for me, one of those things is chronic absenteeism
because no matter what the absence, whether parents? No, I do not know parents called it and did not call it in. It still counts towards chronic absenteeism. If you're not there, you're missing
construction. So I think that has to be part of the purpose. So for me, that's the communication as well from the board. The second piece, it's communication to the public.
If I pick this up as a member of the public eye would be overwhelmed. It's one big lump. Of unstructured information. Have to break this up to make this
manageable and adjustable. We need to have section one purpose. Section 2 attendance in school. The sections have to be outlined with women girls to be consistent with
the other things that we have had. Thirdly, one of the things that I see here that I do have a question for staff. This is and or student
attendance at school where it suspension is not excused. I have to find it. >> If anybody sees it, I
thought suspensions were part of the excuse absences. But that's something here said it was not necessarily so. Does
anybody get see if I did circle it? Under Yes. So that's thank you. So that's
question one and question 2, which makes me really uneasy under an excuse absences. This is. Again be is labels at as is labeled as an excuse
absences and yet see talks about said unexcused absences, which I know is a form adding problem, which should not be. But that last sentence as other ways, it's unacceptable
to the principal or his He's a her designee. This makes it really subjective and we might run the risk of an excuse that is allowed at is not permissible.
>> That's cool. Be. The regulation should be very clear what those are. So I'm not sure if my hesitation is and the language or whether
there's really some subjectivity built and to this, which I'm concerned about. So I'll pause and hear answers to my 2 questions.
Well, I think suspension is it considered excused except for certain violations. >> And that's in the rights and responsibilities as are outlined in. would have to pull that up to tell you what
the exceptions are. But in general suspension is excused. The unexcused. You know, I don't know that it's possible,
The new Marie, every possible. Unexcused absence topic sort of falls into the other duties as assigned type of an answer.
But it is going to be somewhat subjective. I think. I don't think you're reading it correctly.
>> Yeah, thank you for that. When this goes back to you, which I also agree with, I think this has to go back and just kind of be cleaned up and tighten quite a bit. I would
love to also have that information and regarding the circumstances under which the suspension is not excused because I'm interested in that. And I'd like to see if
there's some way to tighten up the language doesn't appear to be this subjective. I that causes me some concern. I think that's my time to go
back. Sizemore Heizer. I just have. And additional question, why are we talking a suspension of driver's licenses as absentee? Isn't that concerned me in this
policy? >> It's a >> Has its own questions and concerns in terms of we may ask for a suspension in that
it says that this issue may suspend. And I don't know why we're talking with the DMV may do. That's not under our purview. But I do wonder why.
It's under report suspension of driver's license on Page 2. >> Well, I think it's here because if a student has 10 or more unexcused absences, the
principle may notify the court, which could take action. went apologize. You askeal. And so what it says, I just don't know. Like
is that? >> Typical that asked for suspension of a driver's license for unexcused absences that something that we have to required to do. It just seems
if someone can't, an excuse they can't get to school. I would take to the drive. It just seems a little odd of a thing as punishment to for an excuse absences. I'm trying to understand the reasoning for
it. >> It's just a loud. So it says maybe it is something that I think it's indicated here because it could be a deterrent. The way if I may.
The truth we don't take driver's license. The system doesn't juvenile domestic court. >> I understand that. I'm just asking why are we? >> Putting this? Why are we
flying? Because lots of things in Nassau are for which we have been pretty severe, you know, behaviors that for which we have consequence, I've just never seen for any other.
Issue. A consequence of reporting to the gym, not divest a court to suspend a driver's. I'm we don't suspend the driver's license, but why in this particular thing what we want to suspend some of these drivers license, it
just. Doesn't make a lot of sense. If you're having trouble getting to school, taking away the diverse list isn't gonna asking for the court to take the drivers as is in good health and get this cool. So I just want to
understand better why this particular thing we have it this and maybe there's others that missed it. But I don't recall seeing this or anything else. >> So I think it's here because it is a strategy or a
possible consequence to having. 10 or more unexcused absences. And I suspect a school might say if they didn't have a car, maybe they
could ride the bus get to school and not leave campus. I mean, I I don't know why they might use it, but they have a choice to as part of an attendance. We have
consequences that we want. We're I just feel like. Yeah, I mean, I just I feel like it's an odd thing to have here. This. >> Students don't drive what
if they don't to school. But just feel like a very odd consequence to have here to be very kind of uncomfortable it for have that kind of consequence. I think it should be the S on are not in this
policy because it would be unclear to somebody maybe it S on our maybe there's a cross reference in there. I don't know. But I. I want to understand a little bit. It
does refer to the sesaon are, but I yes on our list. This is the consequence for absences. But I'm very uncomfortable with this. But understanding why for this for absenteeism, this particular consequence
was selected versus others. I just I'm very uncomfortable It feels a little bit like. 10, 2030, years ago when we when the state that the school system suspended driver's licenses for a variety of
things which actually had a more negative consequence. You know, for other areas of concern if the actual issue for which the license was suspended and it feels a
little bit like that was also thrown in here for this reason. And I want to make sure that it is actually a valid consequences related to improving absenteeism as opposed to just kind of let's
dispense of these drivers less. And so I would not succumb to moving forward this what I getting a much deeper understanding of why for absenteeism to spur consequences specifically if it's still best practices,
even even if they had a reason for whatever it was list. I mean, it's red lines. So I'm assuming it's new, right? So why let what's specifically for absenteeism is a
consequence of reporting some of the drivers license important. I just I would like to understand that better. I don't have an issue having consequences. I just this one concerns me. And since it's
new, I soon they had a reason for adding it. Well, I think they added it to list as part of a comprehensive response to 10 or more. >> Unexcused absences. But
this is something the principal can do. >> Yeah, I get that. They can do Why would we want to do it? Versus something else? It's a
philosophical question. I'm asking here, right? Like if the staff it. Why is this the particular thing we want I feel compelled King in circles. I want to understand
more why we wanted potentially risk some of the driver's license for absenteeism. We would do that for some when it's not as something else and there's could be other ways of deal absentee is like why is this particular thing
recommended? Just because we can do something doesn't mean you should kept. So think mystics it. >> I actually had the same
cotton I read this about I know in the previous iteration be did have if there's a further son's attendance officer vilifying the complaint you denied and domestic relations court. But
it did not address a suspension off driving license. Is that the automatic even read for somebody to be juvenile domestic relations district court and that under
18 that the decides the suspense or private eye says. like I don't know what law behind that it is. It's
because president in that you know, do it before, but it did not they specifically the license suspension. It's not automatic. That Prince Okay may notify the court and the court may take action to do
that. >> After >> 10 or more unexcused absences from school on consecutive school days.
>> I 2 issues. One of the show could be that, is not going to but there are taking care of family member. Are there out of school fired them, you
know, making a living wage for its first any reason and then not able to go to school for some reason. I do not want them to have an additional, you for you know, a the and
off taking their John's of getting their license taken away. So I'm a compassionate grounds. Like, like, want to
put it on the policy could be in the U.S. and not us are in on regulation. That's fine. But I'm just not comfortable leader. Thank Take a turn
done. Okay. I'm gonna take a current turn. I'm going to make an assumption. >> I am in agreement. My colleagues need to go back because in some formatting issues as we have some other
questions. But I'm gonna make an assumption that when. This the 10 days is reported to June on domestic court that this has to happen to somebody. Okay and that
they're just putting it in the policy to parents. Can't you know that killer is like a big of however, I've written in my notes that we would like an answer to why this was added as we need some historical context to why this was added,
if we're going to actually send it back. And if in the flip side of that is we again are not making the decision as us as a school system. We are not doing anything with children's licenses. Its juvenile domestic court, who
we have no control over, but we do have control over is whether we make the report. You know, in terms of the absenteeism. So I again, I just want to reiterate, I have
notes here and I think I've captured. But what folks have had to say and I'm in agreement with sending this back to staff to revisit and bring back to us. I'm seeing additional placards for go
Back and I'm trying to them Aaron. Dre, do you think we shoulde students licenses away if they're absent 10 times? The park, suspend them or do something or whatever
that is. >> You know, I'm not sure that, you know, again, we're trying to provide you with a policy that has all legal citations.
>> As current as possible, >> I don't know. must be some rationale for this in some cases. I think it would be a rare case, but it could it
could be something that could be helpful or not. I it's just a tool that's out there. And therefore noted if the board doesn't want that tool noted.
We will not included in the policy. So I'm looking at the memo for this one. 20 to 32 doesn't say who on your staff reviewed it in comparison to
the triple to 0 memo which says the office of the chief. >> Experience Officer Review did so again, I think form is needed to be sure that. The
appropriate offices are reviewing it. And you're telling us who reviewed it. But I guess that I have a hard time thinking that. The superintendent would think this is a good policy given
the tremendous investment we've made in. Absenteeism. I'm looking for your best suggestions on what to put in
policy. I think the more that we sit here and debate things, I think it, you know, with the demo had said. We think that this needs to have. What are
my comments we still think you should combine all the medical and things we think that the military language should be clear, even just pointing it out might not necessarily
provide the actual language. The definition of unexcused absences. Incorrect. I'm I feel like we've made really
good progress today, but we can't keep. Going through things that you personally don't think. Have merit. Dr
Reid. Well, says it could have merit in some circumstances. >> But the actual definition, I mean, on the other point, the definition of an excused absence is not accurate. And
just literally wrong. knowing that little definition, the unexcused absence. been up there. We're operating under today. Well, it that says
here, it says that unexcused absence is one for which the parent or guardian does not have prior knowledge, consent or legitimate reason. So for instance, when my son went
town with my husband for a family event, that was an unexcused absence. We knew about it. We had prior knowledge. We have consent. But it wasn't considered
legitimate to the school because it was in medical or otherwise related. All right. It gets in and or legitimate
reason. That absence meant none of those right criteria. I actually got a letter because my son was out 5 days so far this year. 2 of them
were for sickness and 3 of them were for what the school considered, not legitimate reasons. And so 5 days, the practice is to send a letter.
But this definition doesn't say that. I mean, I think. Just given that we've spent hours on this topic at our goal Sessions and strategic reporting Sessions to not have a really robust definition of
why this matters at the outset is just. We need your help to craft these things. And I'm also wondering, should you have more staff here to help 8?
>> I think we've crafted nigh. You know, we could discuss what and slash or means, but you know, I'll go back in, worked to draft a better
definitions so I can I can do that. This definition has been there since. >> that's what operating under now since 2011. So. >> But Dr for years. t that's that's like the worst
criteria we could possibly None of us were here. Then we want the best recommendation on what you think should have been. Now your time is up. I will go back and write a
better definition thank I appreciate question. I appreciate what has been said and I don't disagree with everything that's been said. But I also want to leave this on the table. They are going
to be times and I'm not necessarily saying this is one of those times, but I am saying they're going to be times with the superintendent brings forth her best thinking and we still disagree with it. So I just want to be sure. I
definitely disagree with this on the basis that it's only applicable to a small number of kids because we only have X number of students who are who
have driver's licenses. You're I want you if you're talking to the definition smoke since not an overtime license, please, we have a small number
of students who have driver's licenses. Add to that the layer of a principal may on may not do it. So in my school, I have these 2. A
driver's license is I don't like Robin that much. I'm going to exercise my discretion and make this report. But I like Melanie, so I will give her the benefit of the doubt when we have kind of
practices that. Do that. It gives me nothing but applications, but I'm not going to beat that horse to death. I think we've been there. The other thing that I see here. There's a lot of
procedural things that should be in the regulation. I think as a board, we're going to say you must do these things. So page Page, 2 where we start
with attendance reporting going down to what principles must must not do. I think that can be captured in a very sus sentence or 2 page 3. Again,
lots of details in terms of how to do it. I don't think that's what we want to live. We want to live and that overarching the superintendent must make sure these things are happening. But there's a
lot of how that is a vetted here. So when you go back to to review Dr Reid, I would love for you to take that into consideration. And I'm happy to give more specificity. So which sections I'm speaking
about, but I have 6 seconds left and I don't have time. >> Okay. Seeing no other I'm
just going to say in terms of the might take a turn terms, the driver's licenses if it is not. Hopefully the main notified human on domestic
court is spelled out in regulation because I do believe that when I was working at Chantilly, this was a very consistent practice. And we followed the tells us exactly what to do. So I
believe that that May is probably clarified regulation, but but but I think we're leaning towards having you take this back. I will go back to the unexcused absence definition it is. And and or they're often times parents
have no clue their kids or skip skip school to the parents, not aware of the absence. There's certainly situations where they have provided consent, but it's not legitimate reason. So I don't
have as much. With that definition is. I lived it nor do I think we can list every single example because you would be amazed kids and families will walk in with an there's no way it's going to
be exhaustive list. And so I just want to, you know, put out there and he throws that. I do understand the complexities of trying to define us and I do understand
it's an and or so. Any other comments. Questions on this policy? I'm going to as the chair make a recommendation that make a motion that we
send it back to the superintendent. With notes related to the discussion, ask her to rework it and bring it back. To have a second took
second for Miss Mayor. Dr Anderson. So. But vote to call the question, we just thank
you all those in favor of sending it back. Dr Reid. That's unanimous. Everyone
here in the room. Thank you. And the sticks it. Next up. Policy. 23. 0, one psychological testing
screenings to devaluation and placement. Thank you, Miss I thin made
>> honestly, minimal changes. And the purpose is pretty straight forward to establish policy regarding provision of psychological services for students. So this was last
revised in 2013, so its newer than the last one. only 12 years out. So happy to answer
any questions. This >> There's no mention in the policy that services can be provided by partners and other
government programs such as our Hazel Services. Well, that wouldn't be I guess that one. I wonder about that. Again,
we're not really saying why we value this like what's the board's philosophy on this? And we also should say that it's not a service that can replace private counseling and
psychological testing. What about something that says that its? Needed to make academic decisions, including IEP and 504. And related to the
academic. In the 4 sons from the bottom. It says concerns that are not. That's the right word. Is it challenges as it needs? Should mental be in there? What's the breath of
psychological services and again, can we say it's standard to include these with an IEP evaluation, Henry about which I believe. It is, but I'm not sure. And are there
any state code references to this at all? Those are my comments. I think it needs to
go back from work. Do you want a response? I'd like to hear my colleagues think I just I don't think any of those questions are. There will be
in turn also. I think it needs more work. Dr. Anderson. Thank you. >> This is a space where there's a purpose there. But the purposes it's to establish
a policy. The purpose has to speak. So why we want to have the policy. And I think we've done that and some of the places a little bit better than others. Even going back
to well, maybe it's also the philosophy. I think there's some space here for us to be a little bit more intentional. Again, this communication tool to the public and to the
superintendent. We're not saying anything. To the public on this. And that's incumbent upon us. So I'm not going to put this entirely at the feet
of Dr. We because this is the board's intent to communicate to the public. What do we want to say? What is off a loss of what is our belief around this? So I'm not ready to move
on this because I think it is missing that piece and some other things that I shared earlier. So I'm not going to belabor the point, but I'd like for us to be a little bit
more. It feels empty. I just like for us to kind of flesh it out a little bit. But I think that's also our responsibility as board
members. Mystic's it. >> So I agree that the Mike Leake so far about this and I think this is like of really jai and word gun. I cannot
seems understand head and a love this. I just feel like we need to see the regulation, which is which associated did
I'm sure that's like 10 pages long. I really want to look at this more inland. What this does that would that one of
services means it should be I just don't like one paragraph policy, especially if it leads to so much so much oath. The parents involved teachers and lot services counseling. Professional government only
got this storm, a chair, but really no content. So this needs to be worked on. Thank you. Sizemore Heizer.
>> Yeah, I think maybe. I understand it may be having a broader purpose to explain kind of why we do this. But I also know that generally policies are particularly abroad in the way they're
written in my understanding is that a lot of times when psychological testing that goes with local screening committees as well as re evaluations for IEP cervical screenings. For referrals for special education or referrals
for other needs. I think that's what this is probably aiming at is allowing for the school system to provide those types of consultations with families for local screen. But
does or any is that kind your understanding of What's would you say? The purpose of obviously we want a bill authorizing services? Is that what would you understand? The purpose of it? You stated it.
Yes, I think with. You know, that's how I see it. So I I think it'll be hard to limit it. Just to local screenings, Henry values just because it might be other things for
which like threat assessments, for example, might be done as through this as well. So I you know, we're also providing
access mental health services with his ill health or telehealth services. So I don't know if we need. More than what's here, because I think that's when the regulations as the different areas for which we need to provide a psychological screenings and some are
required by law that we need to do that. The screenings for revaluation. So I'm comfortable with ths it is. If you wanted to add that the purpose psychological
services for students as part of identification or supports, we could do that. But I don't know how weeds flush out the purpose without listing all the different areas for which
we do evaluations. I'll take a My initial thought was. And I was fine with this. However,
as we've said here and had a conversation, my recommendation would sunset this policy altogether. >> There is no BS BA sample policy. This is south of that soup. I don't know why it was
ever created because when you reference what we do with psychological services, there is so cue psychologists have just like counselors day
there. They know what able to do when it comes to local screening committees and recommendations for testing. That's all spelled out codified in the law. So I
would say that we sunset because I'm going to look to the SBA has a sample. And since they don't have a sample, this is looks like something that at some point was created that I don't think it's needed a longer. We're
going to go backs. And we're gonna go back to man. First. I find it curious that there's no state code. Is there any
state could referencing this? I would have to >> confirmed that. You're correct. Ms mayor, and that there's no code listed in the in the and of the policy as
there has been in some of the other policies discuss today. Okay. So. >> I'm not sure what it's going to take to receive a draft that we need. I really
feel like this is just polling. The superintendent along this is not a sufficient response. And when I look at the memo, it doesn't explain.
What do you think? Should we have this? How does I'm not accounts or likeness. What is this to do? We need this. I mean, this is going to be a painful process. If we're just
getting the minimum and I don't understand our disconnect. I just knowing the caliber of work that you do, doctor eat. I can't imagine
that this meets your bar for excellent work. And I just don't I don't understand. It. Always policies in at. You put
awful things together that we put our name on all the time. The budget, the report to be approved. And yet with these policies. It's I get it. It's
our polianners and you can do your job if we don't have the right policies and your recommendation for what you think should happen in the schools that you manage. I do
want to have this conversation every month again and again. We also supposed to get a calendar of the proposed schedule for view. I thought that was to be today. Should
be posted. I provided Yes, I have got. that's on me that if I did not provide I also didn't provide it because we're going to push for policies perhaps to the next meeting that we're not getting too today. It's an aggressive.
>> But calendar. >> I get a get it. But again, if we're not going to have some real reasoning for why we would want to keep a policy like this presented. I mean, what are other school
divisions do? What's the best of I already sent all of those recommendations and share them with all of you and said here, ideas for what should be
relayed to the board. You know, standard information, relevant, best practices. If you think our office to do all
that, then let's just say it and figure that out. But Dr Anderson. very quickly, because we're coming up to
them to the hour. I am very much fascinated regarding your proposal to sunset this all together and the reasons why is because I don't see any
legal reference to this. But before I fully support this in this conversation, would it be possible for staff to when we come back to this, which I think we will have to no matter what. Kind of check
around to see one of the blind spots if that's going to be sunset. Clearly there's no code attached to it. So there's no legal reference.
It's a foster that you can find. So maybe we do. We do stay out. So I'd like more information about whether or not this is needed and what this is tethered to, that
would be a pot hole that we would want to avoid. Otherwise, I would be wanting to entertain the sunset of this. Sizemore Heizer for go
back. That was just in. My question is I wanted to get that if we're going to look at something that's somewhat more information about the impact of that, do we need in the policy to authorize use like a ledge? >> Services and if you don't
have policy, what would be the I mean, you this a lot of the areas and maybe we don't need it. I just want to have sense that before going one with the other. Okay. Seeing as though it is 5 o'clock and I know Dr
Reid has community coming come conversations at 5.30, and I need to get there as well. >> We will adjourn and we will reconvene with this policy and the remaining when we come
back. Thanks. >> Thank you. Bye-bye.