Good evening. This is April Chandler calling to order the Legislative Audit and Policy Committee meeting for December 9th, 2025. We will begin with public comment. Sign up to make in-person public comments occurred prior to the start of the committee meeting. The meeting will be audio recorded and posted in board docs today. We have one speaker signed up for public comment. Um, we will allow three minutes. Our first speaker is Jane Jackson. Let me get comfortable if I have, if I have three minutes, I can talk. Thank you. Um, my name is Jane Jackson.
Um, I've been a resident of Loudoun for over 20 years. Um, My grandkids have been in the school system starting in, I don't know, 26, 2006 or 2007. Um, and I'm happy to be here today to comment on policy 8 65 or 63 30. Um, I just wanna say the interaction that communities have with parents and students is limited. It would be a disservice to stop this activity as proposed
by the staff in this policy revised update. I also just want to say that I had so much trouble following, uh, the process for the development of this policy. I know it goes back to, it started in 23, it jumped to 24, and then there was a long period where, believe it or not, I thought it was already passed and, and there was no issue with the back to school nights, which is what I really like. Um, I've been handing out the school calendars at back to school night, and yes, they do.
Uh, I think I've been doing it for about 10, almost 10 years. Um, excluding COVID when we had COVID-19, I stand away from the entrance doors, my great parents and kids if they're with them, and ask them if they would like a school calendar. I also tell them that specific election information is on the back of side, which includes information about, um, polling locations, early voting, absentee ballot, and candidates running. Now, this is specific to parties. Everybody knows that, um, the Virginia Department
of Education is an advocate, advocate of this policy, of this information, uh, stated on their website. And by the way, constitution Week, um, falls in the, on the third week of September. So this is a super opportunity to engage civically with parents. Um, I think, I think it would be a disservice to take this opportunity away from, um, the campaigns from the, from the information for elections.
And as you all know, we have, you know, our, our, our rate for our elections is, you know, it was not as high as we would like it to be. So we would like to encourage more people to participate in our elections. Um, most of all, I, I enjoy the opportunity to get out and talk to parents, and, and I never had an issue. Um, and I think that a lot of the parents have been grateful. I don't know what issues may have occurred, but if they did, they shouldn't have.
So I'm here to, um, ask that you keep that, that part of the policy that we don't do away with the back to school nights. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, we will move on to item 3.01, approval of the November 18th, 2025 draft minutes. May I please have a motion to approve the November meeting minutes, Ms. Chand? Oh, thank you, Ms. Donahue. Uh, Thank you, chair Chandler. I move to approve the minutes as Drafted. Thank you. Second. Thank you. Um, the motion was made by Ms.
Donahue and seconded by Ms. Shernoff. All those infl favor, please, uh, say aye. Aye. Aye. Seeing none opposed, the motion passes unanimously with all committee members present. Um, we will start tonight with our action items. Uh, first up is item 4.01 policy, 10 35 school board norms, protocols, and violations. Uh, this policy is due for a five-year review, as it was last reviewed in April of 2021. Proposed changes align with the current practice and provide additional clarity. Um, Dr. Bergen, our chief of staff, will be presenting Dr. Bergen, the floor is yours.
Good evening Board members. Uh, this policy is returning to you, having discussed at the last meeting. Uh, the first substantial change is on the red line at line 78, uh, the insertion of professional development expectations for all school board members. And that paragraph was being suggested to be moved in whole from policy 31 20 into this policy. Uh, the next change that we had discussed was at line 1 67. It is our, um, established practice that board members,
uh, including our board members present here today, uh, are visible in our schools and visit our schools. And when doing so, the current policy requires, uh, notification of the principal in advance to make sure that the presence of the board members not gonna be disruptive to whatever's happening in the school community that particular day. But it's been our practice that board members also notify the chief of staff that was not codified. So we have, uh, modified the policy again at line 1 67 for notification to the chief of staff as well as the building principal. And then from the committee, as we were discussing this last, there was a request
to consider adding the duties and responsibilities of the chair and the vice chair into this policy. And so I'm gonna defer to Mr. Allen who worked on these revisions in preparation for the committee today. Thank you, Dr. Bergen. Um, yes, that's correct. Um, persuant to Ms. Cher's request, um, to include more, um, level of detail about board leadership. Uh, staff prepared, uh, proposed red lines to set forth, uh, duties and authorities assigned to the board chair and to the board vice chair.
As you can see, this has, uh, increased the policy about seven pages. There's over 20 policies that, uh, provide for various duties and roles and responsibilities of the board chair. Um, and then also the annual organizational resolution provides some authority duties, responsibilities, um, and there's contractual, uh, duties as well. So those have been added. Uh, and then on page, well, and as an additional clarification, um, on page nine, lines 3 89, um, those are general,
um, recommendations and for consideration of the committee that are included in other school division's policies, we looked at Arlington, prince William Fairfax, and, um, there seem to be best practices for the board's consideration and this committee's consideration in the short term. And then on lines four 11, you'll see proposed language. Um, with respect to the board vice chair, there is, there are two policies, um, currently that address the vice chair role. Um, and the other language
that have has been proposed seems in alignment with other school divisions and neighboring divisions. Thank you, Dr. Bergen and Mr. Allen. Um, Ms. Shernoff, um, since you, I, I don't wanna put you on the spot, but I would love to offer you the opportunity to speak to this first since you developed the, um, proposal. Thank you, chair Chandler. I appreciate the volley and I will take it. Um, thank you so much to staff. And Mr. Allen. I mean, at first I just sort of thought this was gonna be like a tiny little blurb with like five bullet points. And obviously there's a lot of things
that our school board chair has purview over in terms of it being scattered throughout our policy. So to me, and I don't think anyone's gonna be surprised by this, I am happy to see this change. I think it is an important one in terms of the fact of my own scope of knowledge of just reading different policies and seeing those different lines throughout. Having them all consolidated here is lovely. Um, however, I will ask, um, my colleagues if they feel like due to its length and fulsome nature, if we feel like this would be better,
first of all, if they think that this is a welcomed edition. I think that's the first question. The second question is, does this warrant its own board leadership policy? And I'm truly not trying to just keep kicking this down the curb. So I'm happy to leave it in this policy and make it a long policy. Um, but wasn't sure about that. And then I have a follow up question after that, if you wanna respond now to those, Um, Ms. Donahue, would you like to go first? Um, sure. Thank you, chair Chandler. Um, thank you Ms. Shernoff and thank you to staff. Um, I also was an advocate of putting
some delineation of chair and vice chair responsibilities into policy because it has seemed a little bit, uh, gray, um, at times to me in the two years that we've been doing this. Um, I was a little surprised by the length and specificity of this proposed, uh, of this proposed change. Um, I had not considered a Ms. Chernoff suggestion or, or thought, um, of potentially having it be a standalone policy, um,
which I think is worth talking about. Um, I did wonder about the, the red lines that are here. Many of the, many of the duties of the board chair that are listed, um, are listed in reference to other policies. And so I was just curious, um, if we think that if, if the other policies already state that these, you know, matters tasks, responsibilities are in the chair's discretion, um,
if it says that in those other policies, do we still need this? If it doesn't say that in those other policies, if those other policies say the ch you know, the, the board determines, and, and now we're incorporating that here, or interpreting that here as the, this, this will be a responsibility of the board chair. Um, but if it's in the other policies that this is already a, a board chair a matter, would we, would it be better to just cross reference those policies rather than spelling out in detail, um, what may be in other, in the other policies?
Thank you, Ms. Donahue. Just as a consideration for the committee, um, I thought about this as well. Um, anytime that the policy and any one of the 21 policies that are referenced are updated, um, relevantly to board leadership, then that would necessitate this policy or the potential board leadership policy, if that's the way the committee, um, recommends, um, to be updated as well. And so, um, I, I did want pursuant to Ms. Smirnoff's request to be responsive to show the, the gambit
of that and cite the exact specific policy. But I, I certainly think it's within the committee's purview to, um, have that as a consideration, maybe cross-reference rather than specify that would alleviate the necessary amendments to this policy or board leadership policy down the road. Um, thank you, Ms. Donahue and Mr. Allen. Um, I, um, find that I'm open to the idea. Um, I like having all of the information in one place. I don't necessarily want to create anything that's onerous,
that requires a great deal of updates whenever there's a change. But, um, it's definitely not outside the norm of what other school boards do. And, um, I I, I certainly understand that there are, uh, many people on staff who have experience with other divisions, whereas I only have experience really with this division. Um, is it, is this typical? Is anyone willing to articulate whether or not, uh, standalone policy is more normative? Um, I'd appreciate any available feedback. Dr. Bergen. I, uh, am not prepared to answer that question.
Mrs. Chandler. I could go back to the school divisions where I've, where I've worked before to see if there is a standalone policy. Uh, just for clarification, what are the roles and responsibilities of the chair and the vice chair as they're not, unless they're not already clearly enumerated in, in law in the code? Um, Mr. Allen, um, do I, do I recall correctly, you did check some of our surrounding school divisions just for clarity on this point? Yes. Thank you, Dr. Bergen. That is correct. Uh, I looked at Arlington Fairfax and Prince William. They have separate discreet policies for board leadership
that range from maybe a bulleted, um, couple paragraphs very short, um, to three or so pages. Um, I did not see that they cite other policies to the level of detail that is proposed here. But, but again, that was just to be, um, air on the side of more information for the board, uh, committee's consideration. Thank you, Dr. Bergen and Mr. Allen and Dr. Bergen, I apologize for calling on you. I saw your light on and assumed that you wanted to say something, right.
Sorry, I've picked up some habits at the joint supervisor and board of school or school board meeting. So thank you. Um, in terms of my response, I just wanna make sure, um, that I answer both your questions. Could you please remind me of what the second question was? Yeah, the first one was, do we think that this, do we agree that it needs, it was two separate questions. Yeah. So do we agree that it should either stay here or not? So that conversation of like, do we feel like we need it in a consolidated, consolidated place or not? And then where's the appropriate place for that? So it's twofold.
That's interesting. I, I definitely find that I appreciate having it consolidated, um, from a governance perspective. Um, and then I also, I, I'm really struggling with the right path forward because I'm very much aware that we are coming to the end of a term of the school board, and we are about to start at the, a new term effectively of the entire school board with new school board members coming on. And there's quite a lot in this policy, um, that we could have a fulsome conversation about.
And so it's, it is hard to know. Um, and I, I guess, um, would be curious to hear if there are other thoughts on that part. Um, Ms. Shernoff, Thank you, chair Chandler. I feel like you're just queuing me up right through my list here, so I very much appreciate that. Um, I agree. I I was gonna kind of preface this whole conversation tonight with there are, there are fulsome changes to almost every action item tonight that I believe, some of which have not gone even out to the public, um, for feedback at this point. I know we kept them as action
because we didn't necessarily know if we were gonna bump 'em back or not. Um, so I am kind of thinking in the same vein as you, especially as it relates to 10 35. Um, I'm also thinking in the same vein for 63 30 for what it's worth when we get there. Um, just in terms of the magnitude of changes and what that would mean for the division, not so much the chair responsibilities aren't changing, but that they're being considered where they best seem appropriate. I know that usually in January we, you know, board leadership usually initiate some kind of retreat, and we're gonna have everybody together, and they just had their new board orientation.
Um, when we were first on the board, we had a conversation about other norms that really weren't in policy about how to respond to emails and when that's appropriate. And you know, how we wanted to think about committees in terms of, and I think that the conversation about PMC was actually born in that moment. Um, so I am hope I would be supportive of holding this in a sense conversation until maybe a FULSOM work session could be done in maybe a retreat or a board meeting, and then the new LAMP committee could then take
that direction and apply it and move forward. I, I think that that seems like the logical thing in my mind, and that's what I would be supporting. I don't see how this could go to the full board without feedback from the public on the 16th and then be voted on in the first meeting in January. That feels rushed. And I think we aren't in a rush. We're not really changing the rules. Like I said, we're just consolidating them into one place. Ms. Donahue, Thank you, chair Chandler. Uh, I, I agree that this discussion of the proposed changes
to this policy would benefit from, uh, from having the input of our soon to be incoming additional new board members. Um, I am, I, I think I would be more in support of potentially voting on it tonight anyway, because, and I'll ask staff to correct me if I'm wrong, but my, my concern would be if we don't vote on it tonight, then even if we want to have it to discuss it at a work session or a retreat, it's, it's still in committee.
Uh, would I, do I have that correct? Wouldn't we still need to vote it out of committee in our January meeting in order for it to be discussed before the full board at a retreat or work session? Thank you, Ms. Donahue. I, I don't necessarily see that being the case. It's within the board chair's purview, um, whether to address it, whether it's in committee or, or not, so that I don't see that being like, uh, a bar to it. But, So as a follow up on this question, is there an impediment
or, uh, does it slow down the process to not pass it out of our committee today? If we have a work session, would it have to come back to LAMP after a work session to incorporate changes? Thank you, chair Chandler. I think that is a consideration that it might follow that inherently if it is a work session while it's still in committee, that the board or during that retreat, they could, um, provide that recommended next step. Um, so just as thinking this through, if it came out
of committee today and went to the full board, it's within the chair's purview pursuant to policy to potentially put it on as an information item, um, on the 16th. But the chair could also, based on the reasoning that the committee provides, is hold off on doing so. And then whoever the new chair who is elected on January 6th, I believe is the date, would then be, you know, charged with putting the agenda together and, uh, could make the decision to hold off until the retreat is had. Is there a precedence for, um,
something like this happening and, and actually making edits at a work session that would then be incorporated and go to the full board for consideration? Thank you Chair Chandler. I, I can't readily think of one during my tenure, but I I, I don't see why that couldn't be done. Thank you, Mr. Allen. Um, committee members, uh, based on the information that we have, um, are there any other, uh, thoughts, comments, or motions? Um, Ms. Don? Thank you, chair Chandler. Um, yes, I am, as I, as I said, I,
I would be in support of voting on it tonight, just to have it out of committee so that we could have a fulsome discussion before the full board in January. Um, but if that's not the will of the, of the majority of this committee, um, obviously I will, I will abide by the majority preference. Um, I am, I am definitely in support of the added language around professional development and the change in language related to school visits. Um, we discussed, um, this, this matter of delineation of leadership responsibilities.
Um, and the only other thing that I wanted to address was that I, I don't have, I do not have a proposed amendment right now, but we have discussed previously one of the, one of the provisions of policy 10 35 is towards the end of the policy on beginning on, um, 4 99 of the December 5th red line is violations of this policy or other policies by board members and the, um, potential consequences that, um, that are available. And we have, this has come up
before for our board, um, kind of reviewing and considering the provisions that are put forward in this section. Uh, I have, I have long had a concern that, that the options listed currently in this version of the policy don't have sufficient teeth, um, in all circumstances to discourage or sway, um, when they're, when there, when an issue may arise. And so that has been on my mind quite a bit. And, um, and when this does go forward, I would like
to have a discussion and may well propose some amended language, um, that would attempt to incorporate some other options into that section. Msna, Thank you. Um, chair Chandler. I als I, I think that that point in and of itself, um, I just feel like there's still a lot to unpack here and we have a lot of transition coming, so I'm not gonna support it moving forward as long as it doesn't impede our ability to potentially have a work session around this. Um, there are other things that I would like to consider in terms of adding to the policy in terms
of chair's responsibilities. I noticed in here there's not a lot about expectations of the, there's a lot about what the chair can do, but then there's not a lot about how that relates back to the full board in terms of communication. So I would like to see, I mean, just even on lines, um, red line 3 49 on the December 5th version, it talks about in the school board shares authorized to execute contracts, letters of agreement, and other legal documents necessary to carry out actions of the school board. And then it talks about signing those. But then, like, I would love to see and then communicate that to the school board, like, so
that we're always looped in. I know that we're a big division and that that's an efficiency thing, and I, I totally understand and trust that the chair can execute that in partnership with the superintendent and staff, but sometimes in the last two years, we would find certain things out from constituents or schools or media instead of hearing it firsthand. And that's just something I wonder if in policy, if we could tighten up some communication structures to make sure that what the chair is working on is also available in knowledge to the full board.
So I have some other suggestions to that end. So I'm not gonna support moving it forward tonight for those reasons. And mainly for the reason that this section in particular, I don't believe has gone out for public feedback. Is that correct? Dr. Bergen? The, uh, public feedback was on the revisions that were proposed to the committee at the last meeting. Right. Which did not include, of course, uh, this enumeration of the responsibilities and duties of the chair and the vice chair, because that was a conversation that happened during the meeting last time, so, yeah. Yeah. So our practice is to send out
for public feedback the information that the committee has received. Yeah. So the, what the committee did receive, there's the related, much less contentious, but related, uh, issue with the revisions as presented. Last month was the new paragraph B on professional development for school board members, which with discussion with this committee, we lifted out of 31 20 to land here, right? 31 20 was on the agenda last month for the board. And there was a comment from, I think Chair Mansfield that she was, uh,
wondering about taking action on the revisions to 31 20 because this language was being removed from 31 20 to be placed into here professional development of school board members. So, uh, a different issue then, you know, whether or not we, we list the duties and responsibilities of the chair and the vice chair. But, uh, I, I just wanna bring to the committee's attention that 31 20 may need to come off of the school board's agenda for action because it relates to the changes in this policy.
Interesting. Okay. I, you know, I just think that I appreciate that we got to a point where we could add this, and I understand the process of when it's information, then it goes out. But just in order to follow best practice, I mean, this is a pretty fulsome ad. And if we were to look at adding teeth to consequences and communication, if we were to start adding things on, I, I think that it does kind of evolve into a different kind of conversation. And so for those reasons, I will not support it going to the full board. Thank you, Ms. Shernoff. I actually, um, wanna circle back and I just have a fundamental question, um, online 3 56,
where it says, while all school, school boards are responsible for representing the board's positions, I was just curious if there's a word missing there. I think it's probably school board members would be my guess. Mr. Allen, right? Yeah. Okay. So that was just something that was on my list that I hadn't had an opportunity to bring up. But, um, so then we can ask staff, uh, to make an adjustment there. Um, I would like to suggest, or actually I'll, I, I will make a motion, um, that we send policy that we vote policy 10 35 school board norms, protocols,
and violations out of the LAMP committee and ask the school board chair to hold this item for the next term of the school board so that it can be discussed in a work session after the new school board is seated, and a new board chair is elected. Second. Thank you. Um, the motion has been properly made and seconded. Um, is there any discussion? I appreciate that change, and that is something that I can support. Okay. Um, any further discussion? No, I, I really just to, to be fair
and put it on the record, feel like this is, I would like to give, um, I, I'm assuming there will be lots of change in the new board term, and I had, have really, in my own mind, had this idea of being able to wrap up our work here so that we can start fresh re whoever is sitting in the chair, um, next year. And so having the ability to continue to work on this and to work on it together as a full school board with our new members is very appealing to me. Um, so that is essentially why I made the motion. Um, is there any further discussion? No. All right.
Seeing no further discussion, uh, the motion has been properly made and seconded. Um, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Seeing none opposed, the motion passes unanimously with all members present. Thank you very much for the fulsome discussion. Um, with that, we will move on to our second item, uh, item 4.02, um, policy 2230, legal counsel. Um, this policy was brought forward as part of our ongoing effort to update the policies around staff who report to the school board. Um, Dr. Bergen, I believe tonight you'll be presenting.
Yes. I'll start off. Uh, we brought this to the committee last month for the five year review, uh, with some minor recommended changes inserting the word legal in front of counsel and further enumerating that the attorney may have not only just attend meetings and committees, but also task forces and other entities created by the school board. And in the discussion with the committee last month, there was an amendment by Mrs. Chandler, uh, which was a update to the name of the policy to Office of Division counsel.
And you've been further enumerating the responsibilities and duties of division counsel. And so I'll defer to Mr. Allen to walk us through the other substantive changes that are before you tonight. Thank you, Dr. Bergen. Um, Mr. Allen, Thank you, chair Chandler. Um, actually, uh, upon this being the, the Chandler Amendment, I believe I, it might be more appropriate for you to walk through, and I'm happy to comment, um, as needed. That's completely fair. Thank you so much. Um, to, to be honest, I, I really was looking for a way to,
um, offer more clarity and to outline, um, what's happening in practice in policy. And so you'll see there are definitely, um, more details in terms of the policy and what expectations we would hold, um, For our division council. Um, in terms of changing the name, I, I do think that's appropriate given that that is, um, in line with what our practice is. And additionally, it
really is step by step, um, outline out outlining what is currently happening in our relationship with Division Council. And, um, really some of the primary changes include, um, having a review of legal services, um, as part of the, uh, division Council's annual evaluation, um, which I think offers the board an opportunity to really dig in and perhaps preview some patterns before they become problems. Um, that said, given that I developed, um,
most of this language, I wanted to take a moment and make a motion after rereading the policy today. I saw some things that I would like to clean up. Um, so I'd like to move to strike at line 26, the term task force, because that's not a term that we typically use and replace it with work sessions, public hearings, special meetings, um, and of the school board. And then on line 27, I would like to replace the of, um, and change that to or, and at line 73, I'd like to correct the spelling of employ. Can you say the second one again?
Um, so at line 27, currently it says school board chair of superintendent, I think, and I'd like it to say, or, yeah, so entities created by the school board of the superintendent. So it would be the school board or the superintendent. So with that, um, do we need a formal motion? Yeah, I move to make the amendments or to make the corrections to the document that I just outlined. Second, thank you. Um, the motion was made by Ms. Chandler
and seconded by Ms. Donahue. Um, all those in favor? Um, or any, oh, any for, actually, is there any more discussion on the amendment, I guess? And then we go back to, oh, just on amendment? No, no. Good. Okay. Um, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Seeing none opposed, the motion passes unanimously. And with that, um, I'd like to open up discussion, uh, to the committee on the policy as a whole. Uh, Ms. Shernoff, Thank you, chair Chandler.
Um, I did have a chance to review this, and I did have a chance to, um, discuss some of it with Mr. Allen. So I, um, feel really good about the changes. I'm thankful for you outlining them. I especially appreciate the reporting. I think I mentioned that last meeting. Uh, I feel a little bit differently about the feedback loop on this one, just because Chair Chandler did have her fulsome amendment posted last meeting with all of this. It wasn't necessarily part of the Red Line version yet, um, but it was posted. So hopefully people saw that. And we'll have a chance if there's anything, um,
that they would have feedback on to go to the full board. It seems to mirror, uh, very similarly what other surrounding districts have in terms of this, and, you know, mirroring other protocols, I guess, for what division councils do. And these are definitely things that we are familiar with. So I am in support of sending this forward. And with that, I will make a motion to move policy 2230, the red line version to the full board as amended. Second. Thank you. Um, we have a motion to move policy
2230, uh, for, right. Well, oh, it's 22. 30. 30, right. 2230 forward for consideration to the full school board. The motion was made by Ms. Shernoff and seconded by Ms. Donahue. All those in favor, please say, aye. A Aye. I seeing none opposed? The motion passes unanimously with all committee members present. Ah, thank you. And we will move on. Uh oh. Yes. So, sorry if, if I may, uh, I, because we did not say if there was further discussion, uh,
I just wanted to thank Chair Chandler for the effort that you put into drafting the amendment. Um, I was, uh, also concerned by the brevity of the original version of, of the Red Line. Um, and I, uh, I think this version will do, um, a much better job for our, for our district. So thank You. Thank you, Ms. Donahue, um, with that. Um, and, and I apologize for not offering you a chance. Um, next up is item 4.03, policy 25 40 policy manual. Again, Dr. Bergen will be presenting. Um, this policy is due for its five year review
with the last review in September 21. And the proposed changes align with current practice and provide additional clarity. Dr. Bergen, the floor is yours. Yes. Not substantive changes to this policy, uh, in the opening of the policy at line three. Uh, just for further clarification about policies being reviewed every five years, there's a clarification that could be sooner, uh, or if otherwise required by law. And towards the end of the policy in paragraph B, uh, we've updated or corrected the reference to the student conduct policy
and named it as we do currently the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook for Families and Student Code of Conduct. And there was a change, uh, grammatically towards the end about where we, uh, placed the words that we advise the public of the policy manual being available online, uh, but really not substantive changes to the wording or the intent of the policy. Um, I don't know if Mr. Allen has anything more to add. Happy to answer any questions from the board members. Thank you, Dr. Bergen. Um, any questions or discussions from the committee? I, Ms.
Shernoff, Thank you. This is literally just on the fly My brain. As I'm looking through the part about student rights and responsibilities. I know we're having a little, we're having a big conversation about student device use. There's gonna be a big shift in January. Normally, student Rights and Responsibilities handbook would be annually signed and not changed until the next year. Um, I'm thinking also of like the gun sense resolution and the things that we added. We added that at the beginning of the new school year. I don't think we added them. Did we make the change midyear? Well, I'm just thinking about protocols. Yeah. Was that it was added at the be once a year,
at the beginning of the school year is usually when student rights and responsibilities is updated. I think there's going to be a chance that midyear this year, a new precedent is set that we have to update the Student Rights and Responsibilities handbook midyear because of the changes with the cell phone policy. So I'm just wondering if we need to say Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook for Families as updated, but it's really just nitpicking. But just thinking about that change, it's really interesting. I, it's, it's literally on the fly. I didn't have it in my notes or anything. I'm just thinking about that's gonna be a new thing that we have to do this year, I think.
Um, Mr. Allen, Thank you, chair Chandler and Ms. Chernoff. Um, as I read it on line 39, it says a current copy. Okay. Of the, so I think that addresses the concern. Concern If it's updated. If it is, Yes. Perfect. That's it. Um, Ms. Donahue, Uh, is there anything that you would like to speak to in the policy? Um, no. Thank you. Chair Chandler. Thank you. I thought it looked good. Yay. Okay. Um, Ms. She Thank you Chair Chandler. I move that policy 25 40 policy manual redlined version moved to the full board
for consideration as an information item. Second. Thank you. Um, the motion has been properly moved and seconded. Um, all those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye. Aye. Aye. Um, seeing none opposed, the motion passes unanimously with all committee members present, and Policy 25 40 policy manual will move forward to the full board for consideration. Um, next up is item 4.04. This is a new policy, um, 63 30 distribution of information and posting within schools on
school grounds, or during school sponsored events. Um, policy eight dash six five solicitation distribution and posting has been reviewed, and the staff recommendation is that we create a new policy, 63 30 to replace the old policy. Um, division council has reviewed the proposed policy, 63 30. Um, Dr. Bergen, I believe you will be presenting tonight. Um, Dr. Bergen, the floor is yours. Thank you. Um, yeah, so 8 65 is one of those few remaining policies that doesn't fit with the updated numbering,
and that was necessitating the conversation to update 8 65 in numbering of no other reason. This work actually started, as we shared at the last committee meeting, not with this committee, but with the Finance and Operations Committee, with the previous board back in 2022 into 2023. So at the last meeting, uh, staff honored the work that had been taken up, and we shared with the committee the red line version as it existed in the last time it had been looked at by a committee, which again, was f and O.
Um, and we had some discussion about that in our last meeting. And then, um, it's my recollection that you wanted to bring this back for action in this meeting. So, in the interim, after looking at the Red line version, as it had existed from the prior committee coming into this committee, staff looked at this, uh, with a, uh, sharper eye and realized it, it, it needed work. Uh, in particular, just paragraph B has two number ones, as it was presented to the committee last time.
It's just the, and, and they, they had contradictory statements to one another. So we talked about that among staff. We talked with legal counsel, uh, and we brought back a cleaner red version, red line version, uh, that removes the inconsistencies and addresses the problems with the numbering. So what you have before you tonight is, uh, there are some material differences in the policy as we're bringing it to you tonight, as when you saw it last. Uh, specifically around paragraph B, distribution
of political materials. The current revisions in the red line would, uh, allow for distribution of political materials on election days. Um, for schools that are used as a polling site, um, as long as you know, there is, uh, the 40 feet provision so that individuals who are coming to cast their vote, uh, can make a choice whether or not they want to interact with others, because the individuals who, who might be, uh, soliciting are going to be 40 feet from the entrance. So that language carries over from the current policy about
the reference to 40 feet, but it limits that to election day only. Number two, in paragraph B, on non-election days, every day, that is not a day where the public is coming to, um, to vote would prohibit the distribution of political materials on any day. That is an LCPS sponsored activity that would include just coming to school. That would include, uh, back to school night, PTA open house, a football game, anything that is a school division sponsored activity where people are coming
with the presumption that they're coming to participate in a school division led activity. We would, uh, this policy as it's rewritten, would prohibit anyone from campaigning or distributing campaign literature on school property. And that is at the request. Uh, we, we did receive feedback after the last election from several of our schools where there were individuals don't know who the individuals were. I'm just reporting what was reported that parents were coming to back to school night or open house with the expectation of wanting to come and meet with their child's teacher. And the principal is inside the building, attending to all of the visitors that are coming in, and lia liaisoning with their staff.
Meanwhile, there were concerns being reported to the principal, that there were individuals outside on the property who were not remaining 40 feet away, were not stationary at a table, but were walking up and down the line and, um, interacting with individuals who did not want to be interacted with. They were there to participate in back to school night or open house. And, uh, it was off putting to some of those parents as they communicated that to their principals, as they communicated that to the administration. So we considered that feedback as we brought these proposed revisions to you, that in paragraph B, on election days, anyone
and everyone can, uh, be on property to distribute political information, uh, uh, uh, to, uh, engage with individuals who are on the campus, uh, for the purpose of voting on any other day that is not an election day, the distribution of political materials would be prohibited. That is a substantial change, uh, to what was presented to the committee last. I believe it was discussed with the 2223 f and o committee. I, I wasn't there, so I wouldn't know. Uh, but, uh, I'll pause there to see if Mr. Allen is, uh,
any other substantial changes as we've discussed that we're bringing forward to the committee for consideration tonight. Thank you, Dr. Bergen. None that I can readily think of Mr. Allen. And thank you, Dr. Bergen. Um, this is definitely a tough one, um, to be certain. Um, I can share, I've certainly gotten plenty of feedback in person, uh, from parents and families who do not enjoy, um, at the very least, having this activity take place at open house, um, or back to school night. Um, in terms of, you know,
and thank you for previewing, um, some of the challenges. Is there anybody else on staff that has any other examples to share in terms of what it's been like, um, across the division in the last several years? I can share, um, that the last cycle, when you all were elected, that election cycle, that, um, we had to send multiple letters asking folks to please, you know, stop being on property, because that is what would typically happen, is kind of to Dr. Bergen's point there. You know, principal's inside,
parents are inside, it's hectic. People are just there to have, um, you know, meetings with their teachers and tour the school and that kind of thing. And there are folks inside the building passing out, um, leaflets and flyers and those kinds of things with, you know, very politicized agendas on them. Um, I know this year, um, at one of our elementary schools, they went into the library for the open house and, you know, the principals up talking and on the tables there were leaflets all over each table. And so it's like the school didn't put them there. It's just in the chaos of sort of what's going on.
Someone is coming in and honestly breaking, you know, the spirit of what this says in breaking rules related to the 40 feet. And it's really unfortunate because I don't know that we'd have such a problem if people would actually stick to, um, the rules as they're laid out, but they're just, it's not happening. And so I know that it's a hardship for our principals and that our parents, you know, we don't want that to be the first impression on, you know, of our schools when, uh, parents coming for their kindergartner to tour schools, and they're seeing literature that is highly political
and not representative of LCPS. Um, thank you for that clarification. As a follow up, um, could you please, or could someone on staff please walk through what our process is in terms of letting, um, the parties who are in participating before, um, back to school night, like, how do we notify them of what the rules are besides having the policy posted online? Yeah, Absolutely. I'm gonna let Mr. Suter take that one. 'cause He, I thought I was gonna get out. He Executed that this year. Thought I was gonna Get out of talking today. Uh, I would've wore a tie. Um, yeah, this was my first, uh,
this was really my first experience, um, with this coming here to, uh, LCPS. I had never experienced this in any other division that I had had been at. Uh, what I did was, um, I, I looked at the, uh, policies as they stood. I crafted a letter and sent it to each of, um, all of you who, who ran, got one as well, uh, sent it to each and every, uh, elected official, um, who was running. I gave them very, uh, specific policy-based, uh, information related to what they could and, and,
and couldn't, uh, do. Uh, and, um, if I, obviously that garnered some questions from, from some of the new folks that were running for elections. So they, there was political parties too, absolutely political parties, uh, anybody who is running political parties as well as the chairs, uh, of all the, uh, of the political parties as well. Um, and, and fielded questions. Uh, a lot of the new, new candidates who had never run before gladly called me and asked me questions. Uh, now several times I had to send it out again. Um, because the spirit of the, of the, of the agreement
or the understanding wa was, was kind of broken. And I, you know, no harm, no foul. I didn't take that personally. I just sent them letters or called their, called their folks or their offices and let them know. But, um, communication was made very early as it will next time, uh, very early. And it was very explicit. Again, some of the people in this room got those lovely, uh, lovely correspondence from me, so you know, that it was extremely detailed, um, and it was very explicit. Um, and, uh, so that's, I mean, we're gonna continue to, we're gonna continue to do that, at least I will.
Um, Um, thank you Mr. Sutton, and thank you, Ms. Allen. I, um, what I hear from your, um, clarifications is that we have provided adequate notice, um, and the policy has not been followed, um, in many times. I think that's definitely accurate. Um, we've had, let's talks from parents come in complaining. Um, and of course we've had calls from principals going, Hey, this happened on my campus, um, to the point where we've even as a communications office had to do a little bit of damage control when things were left
on cars and things like that, where we had to send something out, um, to the entire community at, you know, individual schools because of something that was left on cars and things. And obviously, again, was not representative of, you know, um, LCP S'S values. So there have been multiple instances of that. Thank you for that clarification. Um, are there any comments or, um, concerns from the committee? Um, Ms. Donahue, Uh, thank you, chair Chandler. Um, uh, yes, I was, I'm sorry about
what we're specifically talking about or, or broader. Broader, um, thank you Chair Chandler. Um, I, as you stated, this, this one is a bit of a challenge because I have, I have also heard, um, from the school communities about concerns when these activities are happening on school property. But I've also heard concerns from, um, similar to our speaker tonight, from people who have done those things before and view it as an invaluable opportunity to be seen in the community,
to make connections within the community. Um, and I do think it's important to try and keep that avenue somewhat open. Um, I was going to propose an amendment, um, that has more specific language, and I, I take, I do not take lightly the feedback that we have received from staff and the fact that we have put communications out, um, regarding, um, use of our schools in this way, or our school properties in this way. And that such guidance hasn't been followed.
Um, I would want to hope that if we have a clearly delineated policy, uh, that is communicated out, um, that compliance will be more, um, forthcoming. Uh, 'cause I, I, our previous policy eight dash 65 did not have a great deal of specificity. Um, it, it was pretty explicit that you had to be 40 feet away from the school building that you couldn't, you know, walk up to people, you had to be stationary, et cetera. Um, and despite that, folks were still, um,
inside the school building or right outside the school building, walking up to people or putting things on people's cars, um, you know, putting literature like I shared, um, just a second ago on tables and libraries and cafeterias where parents were sitting and getting information. So Thank you for that correction. Ms. Allen. I was looking again at 8 65, and I see the language that you were referring to. Um, uh, okay. Um, but I do have a, I do have proposed amendment language, if I may. Um, so I, I would propose that, uh, oh, well, actually
before, well, sorry. Um, at line, at line 71, I would propose that we add a new section B three that would read back to school nights and school open houses, materials for campaigns for public office and other ballot initiatives to include literature, handheld signs, banners or posters may be handed out and, or displayed on back to school nights and or open houses only from a stationary location,
no closer than 40 feet, uh, from any direction to the public entrance door of the school. No such material may be left on the ground or any other part of the property. And all such material must be removed from school property by 9:00 PM on such days. Individuals who hand out materials under this provision must one, remain outside the building at all times, and two, may not approach any other person and may only distribute such materials if an individual approaches and requests such materials. Yes, sure. Can apologize for not sending that
to my committee colleagues in advance. I was writing it this afternoon. Yeah. Thank you for sharing that, um, with us in writing. Um, I am curious, I mean, from a practical perspective, um, back to school nights can also occur during the day. Um, do we, would we want instead to, to specify a time, maybe give a timeframe for after the end of this back to school night items have to be removed within an hour? Is that something that you would be open to? Absolutely. That's a, that's a very reasonable
Suggestion. Um, I am curious too, if you would be open to, um, including something specific about not allowing any materials to be distributed on cars. Yes, certainly. And I, let me look at it again. I I do, And I would all I, so I made, I made those changes so that now it reads, um, all such material must be removed from school property within one hour after the end of such events on such days. Individuals who hand out materials under this provision must one, remain outside the building at all times.
Two, may not leave any such materials on or in any vehicles, and three, may not approach any other person and may only distribute such materials if an individual approaches and requests such materials. Thank you, Ms. Donahue. Um, just as a clarification, since we've been talking about this for a few minutes, um, did you make a, a motion? Um, I don't recall. Okay. But I will. Okay. Um, would we like to discuss it a little bit further? Would you be amenable to that? Of course. Okay. Um, any further discussion from the committee? Um, Ms. Shernoff?
Thank you, chair Chandler. Um, I'm gonna get to this situation in a second, but I have many thoughts. My first, I'm just gonna keep beating it. My first question is, did this revision go out with the, with the striking of the section about back to school night in open houses that did go out to the public for review? Or was that added after The information that was posted, was the information that was brought into the committee? The last meeting? At the last meeting,
Yes. So this section that has been struck would not have gone, gone out for public feedback? Correct. Okay. That's gonna be my first concern. Again, this is, as our speaker said, this is a practice here in Loudoun County Public Schools. I actually don't really know where I fall on this. I'm, I'm a little bit conflicted one, which I know might be surprising to people. 'cause I'm like the politics outta school girl. Um, and I really do under, I, I've heard the same things I've heard from building principals.
I've gotten texts from building principals that have said, can you get, you know, Dr. Spins on the line to help me out. Um, and that really makes me sad that there would be people that would intrude on a school event with their politics and their agendas. Both sides, all parties included. I ran as an independent candidate and I went to every single one of these events by myself and stood out there to promote myself because I didn't have a party mechanism behind me. So I had so many positive interactions with parents
who are coming to school to talk to a potential school board member and was able to engage with them about the issues and the things that they're thinking about. Um, not very many negative interactions. There were people that just passed me by and, you know, not interested. Of course, they're there for their kids back to school night. And there were definitely those moments where I felt like this feels a little icky, um, that I'm doing this, that there's kids when they're meeting their kids' teacher. Um, so I definitely have had those conflicting moments. That's just my personal experience. And we heard from our speaker tonight her personal experience. This has been a longstanding practice.
So without putting this out for a formal feedback loop for our different organizations and an awareness that this might be be removed, I think that that feels fair to me. Um, before I could really chime in, I have my own personal thoughts, but I think this is bigger than that. Um, I think our communities need to hear, I do strongly support this amendment language on upon verse review in terms of tightening things up. If we are to keep it. However, I am not fully opposed to striking it, so without more information and input from people.
So I also, one last thing I'm wondering is if we were to keep it, I would also think there would need to be some enforcement. Like, if you do not abide by this, you will be asked to leave with a verbal warning, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Would that be appropriate? Yes. And a lot of times what happens is in the chaos of the night, it's not, I mean, the person's not, It's who enforces it, Right? Yeah. And so it makes it difficult and it's a burden honestly, on the principal, um, or whoever is at the building trying to have sort of that positive interaction where you then have to try
and find the person who's, you know, handing this stuff out and everything. And it is not the main focus. Um, correct. And I, I think, um, and John and I were kind of side baring a little bit too about like, who's typically doing this is like when this happened a couple times, and it said on the literature, like where it was from, we then, you know, emailed those folks and got no response or anything and it continued to happen. And so there's only so much that we can do and, you know, hey, we, we saw this literature, this isn't okay.
Like it was inside, it was this, it was that, and then there's no response. There's not really a recourse for us. Um, and so that's just worth mentioning. Obviously the intent there is a good one. And I agree with you. If, um, bad actors could stop doing that, then we would be in a better place. But it's just, it continues to happen and we continue to get complaints from parents and from, um, administrators Donahue as a, Um, Ms. Donahue. Thank you Chair Chandler. Um, some follow ups to Ms.
Chernow's comments. Um, one, uh, would it, could we, could we write into the policy that if individuals don't comply with the requirements, that they will end up being no trespassed question for Mr. Allen? Thank you, Ms. Donahue. Um, that could be one approach that the committee takes. Another approach that comes to mind is cross-referencing and mentioning policy 66 20, and it's accompanying LCPS regulation, which is access control.
There is, um, a section, section C about administrative action and what steps are taken. Um, I think that's probably the cleanest and most transparent way to address that, perhaps. Thank you, Mr. Allen. And, and then, um, Mr. Chernoff also mentioned this going out for feedback So my memory is that this policy originally was drafted through f and o and was sent out for public feedback when it was within f and o, because then, Hmm, I'm sorry. I think that that's correct,
but not with the striking out of this section. It still had this section in it is my recollection. This addition is of striking. This practice is a new part of the proposal. I, Well, my, I would, uh, just for a point of clarification, so sorry to interrupt, but I do believe that that is accurate based on what's in board docs on November 18th, that there is no, uh, red line that strikes, um, that section. So my, my concern regardless was that that feedback was from November of 2023. So it is a, a little bit out of date.
And for example, at that time, apparently CEC had no feedback. But I, I agree. Uh, when, while moving forward, I would like to have additional feedback, um, on the additional proposed changes. And just really quickly wanna make sure that there's recognition that it did go out. Again, not with the strikethroughs like Ms. S Shernoff is referring to, but you have current feedback from like M sac and things from 2025 as well. You just have the old and the new. I know it's a lot of feedback. S shernoff, Thank you. I that's, and thank you Ms.
Donahue for the clarification. I, I did go back to f and o and try to find those old meetings and listen to all of this. Um, and I think you're right. I think there were several advisories that didn't, and I know at the time, um, this was pre collective bargaining agreement. There was also, we were getting emails when we first got on the board, um, from LEA about what they could post and what they could do and what entities could be at the event. So I tend to think that this has a deeper and wider reach should we reignite this policy back into the
public realm, especially eliminating this section, considering eliminating it. So that was why I asked just for that last clarification. And I don't, I know it feels like tonight, a couple of times there's been new red line versions as something is action. And I would hopefully we can like, sort of recalibrate in the new year and get back to making sure that those things are just amendments and not tucked into red lines that come later. That way the public has a clear sense for what the actual proposed changes are when they're giving feedback. Um, I appreciate your perspective,
but I wouldn't want to necessarily, um, limit the ability of the committee or the board to make, um, meaningful changes to policy up until the point where we are voting. I I don't know if we can ever get to a perfect position where we're able to get something done early enough to allow for it to be on the feedback cycle. And I think, um, one of the things we know this is a multi-month process, you know, usually things don't move quickly through committee or through the school board.
And so at every step as each change is made, there is still room for feedback. Um, although I do, I do appreciate in a, in a meaningful sense that the spirit of the change that's presented is a meaningful change that will impact a lot of people. Um, but I just, I, I would want to be cautious about trying to get to a position where we're not allowing for changes to be made while something is in action because it is part of the work that we're here to do. So is there any further
discussion? Uh, Ms. Donahue? Thank you, chair Chandler. Um, I had a couple of other minor, um, questions slash concerns. Um, so looking at the Red Line online, 36, um, line 36 references, uh, right. Certain materials that are, um, that are entirely banned, including materials that advocate for or against a political campaign or cause as further described in Section B below. Uh, by that do we mean, uh,
do we mean the definition on lines 63 to 69 material that abdicates election or defeat of any candidate passage or defeat of any referendum passage or defeat of any matter pending before the school board county board of supervisors general assembly or Congress? Can you ask that? Can you say that one more time? Sorry. So, uh, on on line on the red line at line 36, um, the, this section, part four states approval for materials to be distributed or posted within schools or on school grounds will not be given for materials that,
and then there are several categories. Category B says, advocate for or against a political campaign or political cause as further described in section B below, and I'm just seeking clarification when we say as further described in section B below, are we referring to the language on lines 63 to 67 of the red line material that advocates election or defeat of any candidate passage or defeat of any referendum or passage
or defeat of any matter pending before the board, the board of supervisors, general assembly or congress? My layman opinion is yes, I'm gonna defer to, uh, division counsel for legal opinion on your question. That's what makes the most sense to me reading it through, but we don't, it, we don't say, here is how we define political cause. Uh, so I just want, I want to be sure that I understand the intent. So are you thinking in that in four subsection B rather than it saying further described in section B below that we would
say specific lines maybe, or something like That? Something like that. The, the, it looks like the previous version said section B three below. Mm-hmm. Um, but it looks like we're striking the three. Mm-hmm. Um, but I think I, I think if we change it to, you know, section B two below or specific lines, I, I think that would allay my concerns there. Okay. Um, I don't know if I need to make a motion, have that be part of a motion to amend. Yes. Okay. I'll come, I'll come back to that. Um, and then if, if I may, I had one other chair, Chandler.
Thank you. Um, on line 38, which is also in the category of approval for materials will not be given for materials that blah, blah, blah. Um, section subsection C there on line 38 says, are likely to cause substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities. Um, I I'm uncomfortable with the phrase likely to cause, uh, and I, or, or excuse me, likely to are likely to cause Yes.
And I, I would, I would like to ask my colleagues if they would be open to a change of language and what Mr. Allen would think about a potential change to, um, our intended to cause rather than likely to cause. And I, my concern about that is, um, any, almost any statement this in these days can be likely to cause disruption if a certain individual wants it to be disruptive. So I'm, I'm a little bit uncomfortable with saying
that should be an appropriate basis to say materials cannot be distributed if they are likely to cause, Um, in terms of my perspective, um, I find that language to be a little bit unclear and I wonder if we could tie it back to, um, a policy that already exists that outlines, um, appropriate content. Yeah. Maybe 83 60, um, Ms. Shernoff. Yeah, we have similar language in policy 83 60, albeit I will admit I don't love it there either.
Um, so I'm not sure that's helpful to this conversation. I had marked the same notes. I think my question is gonna be the same, whether it says likely or intended is who gets to decide that in our political climate? It's not, there is no way we can define that as someone's intention, or if it was, if it's likely to, I've always felt like this was a little bit of a crystal ball situation where it's like, we think it might cause disruption, so we're gonna say no. Um, and I think it's student publications is is the policy and and expression that, you know, references that same,
and we have run into issues with different student club groups and things that have been told that they can't post things because it is likely to cause disruption based on someone's opinion. So I, I just don't like the language in general. Obviously I don't want substantial disruption of any kind. So maybe we need to address, again, if it causes it, then you know, that it caused it. Um, but I think any kind of projected ambiguity like that in a policy is really tricky to monitor. Anyone, staff on staff, um, have a perspective to share.
Um, Mr. Allen, Thank you from the committee, all three of your perspective. Uh, the policy that came to mind actually for me was 82 73, which is student speech and expression that also, uh, indicates if it's likely leads to or likely to lead to substantial disruption or material, um, interference. Uh, and, and the reason for that is goes back to the, the tinker case. That's kind of the standard that's set forth there. Um, and so the precise language is whether the facts might reasonably have led school authorities
to forecast substantial disruption of, or material interference with school active activities do dot, dot. Um, and so I, I think that gives administration, um, flexibility and to use, rely on their professional judgment and before it gets to a point of substantial disruption, if it looks like it's going that way. So in at least the case law of Tinker, it provides for that flexibility. And, and that's why we kind of track the language and all our policies. And I understand that that leads to some uncertainty. The, the, to the question of who would be the adjudicator,
I think that's, you know, the court, um, um, should go that route. Um, Ms. Donahue, Uh, what about historically caused instead of likely to as a, as an alternative proposal? So just as a, a cautious attorney, my, uh, inclination is always to, to track language of, um, case law or applicable authority. Um, because I think there's more confusion potentially, um, to, to deviate from such language.
Um, I would like to note that it is five 50. I believe there is another meeting that occurs tonight at six. And for forum, we have another item on our agenda that is a discussion item. Um, so could I get a, a temperature check from, um, of the committee members in terms of would this current iteration be able to pass out of committee today? Um, do we have any motions? Uh, yes. Okay. Uh, Ms. Donahue. Thank you. Chair Chandler, I move, uh, show you amendments.
Mm-hmm. Okay. Uh, I move to amend the redline version, um, of policy 63 30 on line 37, where it states, uh, further described in section B below. I move to amend that to, to read further described in section B 0.2 lines 64 dash 67 below. That's my first one.
Second, properly made. Oh, thanks. The motion has been properly made and seconded. All those in favor? Uh, please raise your hand and say aye. Aye. Aye. Um, the motion passes unanimously with all board or committee members present. Um, are there any further motions? Uh, Ms. Donahue. Thank you, chair Chandler. I also move to amend policy 63 30 by adding at line 71 a new section B 0.3 that would read back to school nights and school open houses, materials for campaigns
for public office and other ballot initiatives to include literature, handheld signs, banners or posters may be handed out and, or displayed on back to school nights and or open houses only from a stationary location, no closer than 40 feet from any direction to the public entrance door of the school. No such material may be left on the ground or any other part of the property. And all such material must be removed from school property within one hour after the end of such event. On such day, individuals who hand out materials under this provision must one, remain
outside the building at all times. Two, may not leave any such materials on or in any vehicles, and three, may not approach any other person and may only distribute such materials if an individual approaches and requests such materials. Individuals who violate the provisions of this section shall be subject to the provisions of school board policy 66 20 Second. Um, the motion, oh, um, the motion has been properly made and seconded. Uh, all those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed, uh, the motion passes, uh, with Ms.
Donahue and Ms. Chandler voting in favor of the motion and, uh, Mr. No voting against. Um, are there any further motions? Um, yes, Ms. Donahue. Thank You, chair Chandler. I move that the, uh, that this committee, um, approve the amended, uh, the, the approve, the proposed policy 63 30 as amended to be forwarded to the full board for its consideration. Second, um,
the motion has been made by Ms. Donahue and seconded by Ms. Chandler. All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed, uh, Ms. Oh, okay. So, um, the motion has been, uh, passes with Ms. Donahue and Ms. Chandler voting in favor of the motion, and Ms. Chernoff opposed. Um, was there any further conversation from staff? Um, Dr. Bergen? Just one, um, probing question on the First Amendment from Ms.
Donahue, when you referenced B two and then named the lines 57 to 63, when the policy is eventually published, there won't be line numbers, so it, it won't make sense to say 57 to 63 'cause they won't be there. I see. Thank you for that clarification Dr. Bergen. Um, I'm happy to leave it then with section B 0.2. I don't know if we need to do further motions to do that, but, uh, Alan, Um, thank you, um, on that, yeah.
Yes, you would. Just for clarity the record, and I know time is ticking, but the, the other option to to consider is, um, to use the ProTrac language in four B, which is on lines 36, um, that, or line 36 that says advocate for or against a political campaign or political cause right into line So then that's a direct link, right? Because the language tracks it. So that's, you could either do either approach. Uh, the other item I will say by creating B three it creates, um, inconsist
inconsistency with B two. So I might propose adding notwithstanding section B two above, because back to school nights and open house and houses are LCPS sponsored activities. Just to clarify, Um, Ms. Donna, you, do you have any initial reaction to that feedback? I, I would also say, given that the motion passed to move it forward to the full school board, would it be more appropriate to consider these changes at that time? That's a more efficient way and, um, staff and the committee members can just recall that to propose them then Thank
Are you comfortable with that? Yes. Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you. Um, with that, thank you very much. Um, we have made it through our action items for tonight and we will finally thank you for your patience. Uh, Mr. Woods, uh, move on to our discussion item, which is item 5.01, office of the auditor General 2025 annual report. The annual report highlights the noticeable activities conducted between October 23 and June 30th, 2025. Uh, the annual report summarizes audit engagements
and the hotline concerns and outlines initiatives for the 2026 fiscal year. Um, Mr. Woods, the floor is yours. Alright, I will try to be as brief as possible. Uh, good evening everyone. I'm pleased to present the Office of Auditor General's annual report. Uh, this report reflects our commitment to transparency, accountability, and alignment with the Juan LCPS strategic Plan for excellence. Uh, excellent. The purpose of this annual report is threefold.
Uh, it's to provide transparency into the operations of the OAG, uh, demonstrate compliance with professional audit standards and to show strategic alignment with LCPS goals. Uh, this report has been, uh, prepared in accordance with policy 34 10, uh, which governs the OAG. Uh, today's presentation will cover an intro, a brief introduction into the office of our general, our mission and vision, a review of accomplishments for, for FY 25 audit engagements completed and in progress goals for fiscal year 26,
and an update on the, my concern is hotline, uh, approved by the school board in May of 2022. The OAG was created to provide independent assurance and consulting services that strengthened governance and accountability. We also manage the, my Concern is hotline, which was launched in January of 2023. Our mission is to deliver high performing internal audit services that add value and reduce risk. Uh, we support LCPS by evaluating risk management control and governance processes. Through these efforts, we promote transparency, accountability, and continuous
improvement across the division. Uh, year in review and accomplishments. In fiscal year 2025, we finalized the OEG Audit Manual, launched our quality assurance and improvement program, and completed a conformance readiness assessment to align with the new Internal Institute of Internal Auditors, uh, global standards. We also executed our annual audit plan, implemented post audit surveys, and participated in an external peer review of the County of Santa Cruz auditor controller treasurer, tax collector internal audit division in Northern California. Here are the audits,
the OAG has issued since our last annual report was presented. Audit of student placement policies and procedures, audit of student software applications, uh, audit of it, third party risk management and audit of staff support and advocacy resources. We also have several audits in progress, including a transportation management audit audit of register data integrity audit, uh, and audit of Jefferson Contract Administration. Uh, we also recently, um, began auditing the workforce management.
And so we recently, uh, participated in that entrance conference. Two items. Security badging and school board communications have carried over from FY 2025 into FY 2026. Our goals for fiscal year 2026, uh, will focus on empowering students by auditing systems that support safety and equity. Uh, cultivating exemplary staff through professional development and QAIP enhancements, uh, maintaining an enriched division by reinforcing safety and operational efficiency
and engaging the community through transparent reporting. Uh, the fiscal year 2026 audit plan includes engagements in governance and risk management, health and safety preparedness, workforce management, facilities and infrastructure and professional learning effectiveness. These topics were selected based on risk assessments and stakeholder input and approved by the LAMP committee. The hotline remains a confidential channel for reporting fraud, misuse of resources, and unethical behavior.
Excellent. Now, full disclosure. Um, the right side of the writeup is an error, but the left side does contain the correct information of five total concerns. So in fiscal year 2025, we received a total of five concerns with most occurring earlier this year in 2025. Uh, despite outreach efforts, submissions have remained low, which may indicate either high satisfaction, which we hope or low awareness. Uh, we will continue to monitor and enhance engagement.
Uh, we recently updated our posters and resent them out to all schools and facilities within the division. That concludes the presentation. The full report can be observed on board docs and will be available on the OAG webpage in the coming days. I'm happy to answer any questions or, and hear your feedback. Thank you. Any questions or comments from the committee? Nothing specific. Judge Chandler, just, uh, thank you to Mr. Woods for, for putting this presentation together. Well, um, thank you Ms. Donahue. I will concur and say thank you. I don't have any specific, um, questions
or comments at this time. Um, I do appreciate the work that your department, uh, does in service to the school division and, um, have enjoyed, um, having the opportunity to talk, um, with you at throughout the year to really have the opportunity to fully understand the work that you do here. So, um, thank you. Um, Mr. Woods, Thank you. And, uh, I look forward to continued support and working with you all. Thank you. Thank you very much. And with that, we have reached the end of our agenda. Um, any new business? Seeing none. Um, we are now adjourned.
Thank you and please drive safely Home.