Policy Committee Meeting

All right. If we need to um I have been asked as vice chair whether I can go ahead and just start the meeting so we can go through the agenda and there are a couple of items that we can address before our chair return our committee chair returns. Uh the first thing I would do is welcome everybody to the meeting. Today is February the 3 uh 2026. This is our policy committee meeting which is being held online due to the road conditions and the state of emergency from the recent snow. The first item on the agenda would be consideration of the meeting minutes that were circulated to all committee members before the meeting. Is there any motion related to those minutes?

So moved, Mr. Chair, Mr. Vice Chair,

we have a motion from Chair Swanson to approve the meeting minutes. We have a second from Vice Chair Hershey. Um, if I could ask just for clarification, for the purposes of this meeting, are we voting in assembly or are we just voting in person?

We're suspending these voting due to the arrangement that we're dealing with. So, it'll just be a roll call vote.

All right.

And Mr. Mr. Hagert, as a reminder, we I'm sorry, Mr. Fonire said it would be a roll call vote. Thank you.

All right. Um, unfortunately because we have so many people on, I cannot tell which board members are or are not here. So, um, we'll just start, um, with district one. Is the district one representative here?

Miss Cfield's having some technical issues that staff is working through.

Okay. Um, I believe I see Miss Gordon, District 2.

I am right. All right. Uh, we have Is that an I vote for Miss Gordon? We'll go to Thank you. We'll go to district three. Dr. Ing.

Okay. Someone has sent me the list of everyone else who was on. Uh, we'll proceed to um we have an I vote from Miss Gordon. We need a vote from Vice Chair Hershey.

I

uh we need a vote from Chair Swanson.

I. And I do see that our esteemed chair has returned. I will let her know. We are just in the middle of a voice vote on approval of the minutes. Um, and so I as the vice chair will vote I and I will turn the floor back to you.

Am I echoing now?

You sound great.

Thank Hallelujah. Okay. Or whatever. However you want to praise whatever. Um, thank you, Vice Chair Hagerty. I appreciate that. Um, and I vote I for approval of the minutes. So, is that um, Dr. Ing did text me earlier letting me know that he would join around 120. So, and thank you everyone um, attendees and staff and board members for your patience. I'm glad we we figured out my issue. Um, was there um I know we don't normally approve our agendas, but I do I would like to ask for an amendment to today's agenda. Um, was that done, Vice Chair Hagerty? Okay, thank you. So, in on for some of us, maybe everyone, um, there was an item, item 11, employee mental health first aid training 7645 that still showed on the agenda and I had actually requested for that to be pulled last week. So I would like um a a motion to amend the agenda to rem remove item 11 which we will bring back at a later date.

Madam Chair, I would uh move to amend the agenda to pull the item that you referenced.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you. I believe that was Miss Gordon.

Yes.

Okay. And um all in favor will go again uh district one um district two

I

district three. District four. Okay. And the chair votes I. And district six

I. District seven.

District eight and district nine.

I

Thank you. Okay. So, we've amended the agenda and we did the minutes. So, um, the next three items, 4,100, 4150, and 7425, I believe, are all technical revisions, um, listing citations, but I'll turn it over to staff to walk us through 4100, 4150, and 7425. Thank you.

Welcome everyone. I'm going to share my screen so I can show you where these technical revisions are in these three policies. This is our revised agenda here. Just so everyone can see that we've taken care of our uh minutes. We've amended the agenda. Um and so we were first handling um these first three technical revisions in policy 4100, admission to the Wake County Public School System. The technical revisions are found all the way at the very back of the policy in the legal references. You can see here um multiple revisions um that were made after we we got several of these after we last revised the agenda in October uh

this policy in October. So these are technical agend technical revisions for policy 4100. very similar, if not the same revisions for policy 4150, school assignments and transfers. Those same technical revisions are made in the legal references and also for policy 7425 school administrator contracts. The revision is made here in the legal references.

Great. Thank you, Dr. Crane. So, um, just to confirm, as you know, we saw there's no changes to any of the content or the language within the policy. Um, just those references um that that you all should have seen um in your materials. So I would like to do these as a batch to bring to first reading at the next let's see excuse me um board meeting which I believe is going to be on February 17th. So is there a motion to bring these for first reading at the um consent agenda February 17th? Madam Chair.

Yes.

Yes. I'm Policy 4100, 4150, and policy 7425 um go to be approved out of committee or recommended out of committee for first reading on the consent agenda and at the February 17th meeting.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

I believe that was Miss Gordon again.

Yes. for the second. Thank you, Miss Gordon. And we'll do the roll call again. District one,

District 2.

I,

District Three, District 4. The chair votes I. District six. I

district seven

I

district eight and district nine

thank you so much. All right, moving on to policy 42706145 concussion and head injury. As a quick reminder, because those are technical revisions, they will go on the consent agenda for February 17th, but they only need one reading on consent as technical revisions.

Thank you so much, Dr. Crane.

Sure. Uh our next revision um is in policy the is in uh policy 4270 and uh my apologies. This is what is posted here. We had one revision made by the schoolboard association. You'll see that in red on the screen. Um and I shared uh another revision that was recommended by staff but apparently I c I got that everywhere and shared that everywhere except in the document that was included in assembly. So let me share that additional agenda with you now or that additional revision now. So on the screen now you should see a word document that additional revision same section you'll see the North Carolina School Board Association revision here in red wrestling matches and tournaments. This is uh with regard to um making sure

that a athletic trainer or first responder is present also at wrestling matches and tournaments and staff recommended Mr. Darren Co. um our athletic director is here with us today to for us to revise and say um that we exclude flag football um for this. It is not a tackle football um exercise. So, we revised it to say such duties include, but are not limited to, attendance at football games and practices, excluding flag football, attendance at wrestling matches and tournaments, and compliance with all applicable training and certification requirements. Happy to hear any questions you might have.

Great. Um, board members, let's see. So, uh, Vice Chair Hagerty,

thank you. I'm curious why some sports were chosen and not others. I don't know if that was Mr. Co's recommendation. I just know personally a number of high school athletes who've suffered concussions who play soccer. There's sports like cheer and stunt where, you know, you're throwing people into the air and hope you catch them that seem like they could be, you know, at risk for head injury. The language here says include but not limited to. So I didn't know like which ones needed to be included, which ones didn't, and why like you'd need to specifically exclude one. If you can just give us a explain that a little more. Thanks.

Yeah. So thank you sir for that question. Uh the requirement for wrestling matches, tournaments, and football are state board of ed requirements and North Carolina High School Athletic Association requirements. The clarification to exclude flag football, which is not yet sanctioned by the high school athletic association, is for clarity that it is not required that athletic trainers be

at all of their practices in contests. I would thank you for your comments about the uh the high-risk nature of some sports. And I would tell you that we in Wake County do have athletic trainers or first responders at all contests per the recommendation of state board policy, but not the requirement of stateboard policy. So, it is a rare exception that we would not have an athletic trainer or a first responder on site for any contest uh where there is contact of physical nature. However, the clarification of flag football is that we recognize flag football as a Wake County supported sport and we didn't want there to be a misunderstanding that it is a requirement that an athletic trainer be at all flag football practices.

Perfect. Thank you.

Yes, sir.

Great. Um, thank you, Vice Chair Hagerty. I had that same question. And Dr. Ing, I've seen see that you've joined us. Um it's good to see you and um I'm keep checking the video to for some of our other board members, but are there any other questions from board members regarding um 42706145? Okay, seeing none, um can I get a motion for this to go to first reading on consent for February 17th? So moved.

Thank you. Thank you. I think that's Miss Gordon again. Um and we'll do our roll call vote. So um Dr. Ing and any other board members that have joined us, we are doing all of our votes by roll call and I'm just calling out the district because um it's it's too hard for me to find you on camera. So, um this is for the motion is to put 4270 on first reading on consent on February 17th. Um district one, um what is your vote?

District two,

I.

District three,

District four, the chair votes I. District six,

District seven,

I. District 8 and District Nine. Okay, we got a majority um to put that on consent on the 17th. We're moving on to 8341 settlement.

All right.

And this, let me just say while um staff before staff um goes, I had to review my notes on this. We had a lot of conversation on on this in our both our October and November policy committee meetings. At the November policy committee meeting, we actually voted to put it on the agenda for the December 17th um I think that's the right date, schoolboard meeting, but we ended up um the attorneys looked it over, you know, well before that that December board meeting and we decided not to bring it forward yet. So that's why we're seeing it again today. Uh on behalf of staff, I'm going to walk through these revisions for you. Um the revisions that you see in pink or red on your screen were made by our attorneys. They include on page one in the first paragraph striking the first sentence and in the second sentence striking the phrase all such. What you see at the bottom of the second page was recommended by the committee um on November 19th. This is highlighted in yellow. The change that was made, we rephrased um instead of the board's insurance provider, we rephrase that as legal counsel and and where appropriate the board's insurance provider.

On page three at the top you see highlighted in yellow. This is another revision that we made November 19th added related to the provision of special education services. Change that number to $30,000 there. We struck the our attorneys recommended that we strike settlements in excess of this amount. Um this is already true. We we know that um we added our attorney suggested we add um we had struck or authorized designate. We'd add that back in because our policy does identify an authorized design um related to the provision of special education services. And in section D um we have the our attorneys recommended that we uh retitle that execution and announcement of board approved settlements. Um, and it now reads, "The superintendent may execute agreements that have been approved by the board, and the board may authorize others to do so in specific cases. The execution of settlement agreements approved by the board shall be publicly announced um um as required by general statute there listed there. And I should add that to our uh legal references down below. Our staff are present here today, and we are happy to take any questions. Um, Mr. Ramy, I'd actually like to call on you first. Did you have anything you wanted to add to Dr. Crane's um overview?

Sure. I can give you just a little quick summary. So, as as Dr. Crane noted, most of the edits you see in the in the document were already approved by the policy committee. So, I'll just kind of flag go over quickly the the points that that Rod and I have recommended further revisions. You know, based on the good feedback from the policy committee, we went back and looked at the policy and just wanted to tighten up some language that could possibly mis be misconstrued. We proposed deleting the fir very first sentence of the policy because uh it could be read to mean that the settlement policy is limited to personal

injury claims only. I don't think that's the intent in the schoolboard language, but we didn't think it's necessary and wanted to delete that to remove any misconception. This applies to all settlements. Um, so that's the reason for the changes in that first paragraph. Um, and if you could scroll down to section C, Julie, on the edits, uh, where we Dr. Crane noted that we proposed reinserting authorized design at at the very bottom there. So, the strike out strikeout sentences because it's already stated earlier in the policy. It was redundant. Um, adding back authorized design, we think is important. Just to be clear, the board's been very clear that you expect all settlements um, over $10,000 to be reported to the board regardless of who approved it, right? So even if it was a designate of the superintendent who was authorized to approve a settlement agreement, it still gets reported to the board. That's the purpose of that change. And then finally in section D, uh this is just restructuring and clarifying um the the language that we have here. Essentially, the stat open meetings law refers to the announcement of settlements, not reporting. And we use the phrase reporting to refer to reporting to the board. So we thought it was clearer to talk about there's reporting to the board. that's addressed in an earlier section of the policy and this is about the announcement of the settlements in in open session. Um and the only other substantive change in this section D is that we've added uh a provision that the board may in specific cases authorize a specific person to sign a settlement agreement. So normally the superintendent is the designate uh for for settlements up to a certain dollar amount but we had in mind for example for an EC settlement if there's an upcoming mediation in a special education dispute there's an expectation in the U office of administrative hearings that the person attending the mediation can sign the settlement agreement. So this way we could go to the board ask for approval for Miss Allred or another representative of special education services to be authorized to sign an agreement up to a certain amount and with that specific

delegation of authority uh that person could sign the agreement but other than that um all everything you see here has already been considered and approved by the policy committee.

Thank you. Um, I don't want to speak for others, but we spent more time on this than I expected to at the onset back in October. So, I hope that we've landed where we need to be, but board members, I invite you to ask any questions that you may have.

Yes, Miss Cawfield, can you hear me? Okay. Okay, great. Um, I I know that we did discuss this in policy. Um, and I'm just um and maybe um our attorneys can can help with this a little bit more. Um, but if the board is responsible for approving the settlements and we are having somebody else sign it, um, it's getting they're signing off on it before we actually even know it's happening. It's they're reporting to us that they're signing off on it. Um, I just feel like if we're responsible not only from the financial aspect, but also from it being um, specifically stated with special education, um, I'm not sure if I really feel that's great for it to bypass our us knowing about it along the way versus just getting a report on it later on, if I'm saying that correctly. I'm just worried that things are going to fall through the cracks

or we're not going to be aware that we have growing problems that we need to address in policies and procedures or for the superintendent to get to quicker.

Think I understand the point. I think to to clarify the policy does um the only uh settlements that can be approved by anyone other than the board are under $30,000. That's been the case uh through multiple iterations of this policy. So, uh, when we talk about, um, my point

about specific approval for someone to sign the agreement in in specific cases, that would require the board to vote to authorize someone to sign it after the board's already approved the expenditure of the settlement funds. So, an example would be again, you're in close session for a special education case. Let's say that it would require $50,000 to settle the case. After the board approves the expenditure of up to 50,000, then the person who's attending the mediation on behalf of the school system would have the ability to actually sign the agreement. We wouldn't have to say we have to take it back to the board at a subsequent meeting just for signature. And that's an expectation from the from the mediators. So that's why we're proposing that change, but it would not change the fact that the board must first approve the settlement because it's more than $30,000.

Right? But if we say have 50 100 cases, I'm not even sure what the number is hypothetically speaking, but um if we have all of those cases that are coming in that we are not seeing because they fell under the 30,000, I understand that it helps them streamline and move through the process a little bit quicker, but as a board member, we're not actually seeing those things because we've already authorized somebody else to oversee that. So, we would not be aware that we have an ongoing issue or a consistent issue or something that we should address. So, I'm not sure that I I feel comfortable allowing other people to sign off on things that is approved by the board. At the end of the day, it's it's approved by us because we're allowing them to sign off on it, but we're not seeing it. Somebody else is. And and if I may just very briefly, I see the other board members have comments or responses. Ju um the two two things this is up to the board obviously whe whether and to what extent you delegate authority to approve settlement agreements but the uh one one point is you do the policy does require reporting

to the board. So every settlement must you must receive information about. Also our practice has been we always provide a written update for you to review in close session before the settlement um is is approved. So even if it's within the superintendent's authority, you will get a close session update about what the case summary of what the case is about, the claims, and why the the settlement is recommended. You'll also get a report after the fact.

Um, thank you. We did have extensive conversation about this um in the October and November meetings. Um, Mr. Swanson, uh, you have got your hand raised.

Yes. Um, I I guess I was trying to find a happy medium for uh the concerns that Miss Caulfield was raising instead of it being I think it's section D states that all settlements will be reported out quarterly. Perhaps that could be amended to monthly. Um, so therefore there is an accurate uh uh the board is being a breast of everything that's being shared. Instead of waiting quarterly, it's at least every month. That is a uh desire of of the committee.

Dr. A,

that was just a comment. So, I'm not sure if there was consensus around that or not.

What was a question?

Yeah, I'll I'll circle back to that. Um, Chair Swanson. Uh, Dr. Ing.

Um, yeah. I mean, I I I um like that idea that um Chair Swanson made. Um I think um the the spirit of this policy is to um work on um and some agreements with the other party uh um to expedite the the um resolution of a of an issue. Um and then the

um how to how to act upon it for future cases. I think that's a something that we do want to uh be aware of as as a board um to be able to learn from um what has happened um and then move forward with it and just try to do um do do things differently if uh if it need be. Um so um so reporting it to us monthly um I think that's a good idea uh that Chair Swanson made. Um uh so um I I would be uh for that.

Okay. Thank you. Um if if we if so I I'm I'm willing to support that with a revisit in six months. Um, I know that I think it was in the October discussion, Mr. Neater pointed out that a lot of these are below $10,000. Um, so I I mean, I can live with it, you know, and not not that we put six months in this in the wording. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that as policy chair, um, you know, I will ask staff to bring it back for discussion. I guess that would be in June or July. um for for us well maybe July or August after you know it's been six months with this getting approved um because I don't we do need to be informed but not in the weeds and and I so I have a little concern that this is stepping into that in the weeds territory and let's see someone else um yes Miss Cawfield Thank you. Uh I just um I I I think that's a good idea. Uh it is a good compromise. Uh as Chair Swanson said, uh

to do monthly because it kind of keeps us in the loop. Um coming back in six months, I think is is perfectly fine. It's great to actually see how it's working and and where we're at. Um I think the whole point is regardless of the dollar that we just are aware. Um, so the quarterly report just seemed like too much time could pass. It's only four times in a year for us to even reflect if there's an issue. Um, but I think once if we get the reports in the once a month and we review it in six months to see if that's working is great,

Dr. Taylor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And um uh and I appreciate um revisiting that. I was actually going to suggest it the other way that uh we do the quarterly and then in in certain period of time if we could review it to see if we wanted to change it but I think it works either way. Uh we'll um if the policy is changed to monthly we will do that uh and then we'll revisit in the appointed time and hopefully the board will get the information that they need and we can look to change it back to a different reporting time.

Great. and okay so do um Dr. Crane and Dr. Robinson if you would please make a note um in consultation with Mr. Ra when to bring this back. Um I so I'm thinking if we don't So it's February. Um I don't know that we're meeting in July. So it might be the August meeting. We don't have to decide that today. But you understand the spirit in which we're saying that we really want I want us to revisit this to decide whether or not we need to move it back to quarterly reports. Um I don't want to overburden staff with monthly reporting. So that's why I want to to bring it back at that time. And with that, let's see, somebody else. Uh, Chair Swanson.

Great. Thank you. I just had a I guess a a technical question around um around I

know that if it's it's the formatting is already quarterly, perhaps that could, you know, be a document or or something that, you know, we review in close session or open session, whichever one, um, that could be submitted to the board. So, I don't think it would be uh in the weeds, nor do I think it would be uh in my opinion, I'm just not sure why we would need to bring it back um in 6 months. I don't know if that would be enough data or what not, but I I just think a report that staff has conducted would suffice.

Thank you. Is there a motion to move to um the consent agenda on February 17th for first reading?

Chair Edmonds, I can make that motion. Um I did want to comment before the motion though that you know I I think we can address the issue as an agenda item in policy without formally bringing it back for adoption. I mean, it's just a check-in to see whether or not, you know, it worked, what people think. Um, I agree with Cheriff Swanson. You don't want to have to put like a formal agenda item on it, but at the same time, I think we could still check in. I think I think his solution is a good compromise. So, um, with that, I do um move. Sorry, I lost the policy number.

That's okay. It's 8 8341.

8341 um to uh the consent agenda for first reading. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you, Dr. Ing. Okay. Um, doing our roll call vote. Actually, before we take the vote, let me clarify. When I say bring it back, I mean as an a discussion item in policy. Um, we have done that before with other policies. They're not necessarily on the agenda for a vote, but they're on the agenda as information items. We've got one today talking about the capturing of video on campus. So that's what I mean when I say that I want to bring it back in six months to

discuss whether or not the policy needs amending again. So with that um we the motion on the floor is to put 8341 on the consent agenda for first reading um at our next board meeting in February. And the motion's been um made and seconded seconded. Um District One, what is your vote? I district two.

I

District three.

District four. The chair votes I. District six.

I.

District seven.

8 nine.

Sure.

Thank you. Um, policy 7210, staff involvement in decision-making.

Okay, good afternoon. Um, this policy is designated as a migration policy. Um, it's a partial migration of 3040 and 4040 current Wake County policies. Um, site management. And if you can see, okay, there it is. So for 7210, the black text is the schoolboard association recommended language and then the blue text represents our changes. And so in paragraph one in consultation with Dr. Robinson, we added clarifying language and also just updated language for this policy. In this paragraph, we felt like we wanted to add to the list of areas where employees will be asked to help with developing information to encompass all areas. In the second paragraph, the blue represents the language that we brought over from 30 40.

So that's the partial migration. And then in the third paragraph, we added more clarifying language and gave some examples there in paragraph three. Any questions, board members? Any questions? Being none, is there a motion to put um Oh, Mr. Chair Swanson.

So, as I'm reading this, it it makes it seem as if this is your, you know, some staff could be volunttoled. Um, and so I'm wondering um just that middle section makes it brings that concern. And I'm only speaking as a my perspective of being a high school teacher knowing that, you know, certain teachers have, you know, many things on their plates. And so being, you know, told or requested to participate in something or or, you know, I I just feel like that could be an additional potential burden for some teachers who may not want to participate or not being told, but if their principal is being um, you know, indicating that they have this option or not even an option perhaps or or being told they can serve on this, I'm just wondering, is there ways for certain staff if they choose not to to say no without there being ramifications and push back or folks saying, "Well, policy requires this."

So, which part specifically are you referring to, sir? The just the blue sentence there.

Yeah, maybe that's just how I'm reading it. So, that's why I was asking for some clarification. Um, and if that's my interpretation, I apologize for that, but I just wanted to make sure that

Sure. Sure. I think um and others may have input as well, but for me what it's saying is the principal can define how

to gather this information from others. So I I wasn't seeing the language that required um participation. So, it's it's just saying that the principal of each school or site is authorized to define how those decisions are made and they would have appropriate involvement of those different parties, you know, like as needed to help make decisions,

right? And I I

go ahead. Go ahead.

I can I mean, if it's not appropriate for me to do a follow-up, I can just wait and allow you to go to others if you would like that. If that's easier.

No, go ahead.

You can do a followup. Okay, thank you. Um, just I mean I get how policy states I just don't you know want that perception or or you know I understand the intent of the policy but to a new teacher you know someone saying well board policy 7210 states this most folks may feel as if it's being a requirement. So, I'm wondering if there could be some, you know, some language they can also say or maybe that's a R&P, maybe that's something, you know, some guidance for folks to not necessarily feel as if a principal is tasking you to serve on something or or a committee or or something else to your plate that you already have something going on. You know, you're not obligated to necessarily have to say yes and it's not going to interfere with your job or or whatnot. So that that's just something that is a concern because not everyone knows policy and I don't want the policy to be you know used in an inappropriate form. U not saying that that's what this is but we understand the gist of the policy but not everyone may understand that.

Okay. I see the order um of hands raised as Miss Gordon, Mr. Hershey and um Dr. Matillo, but I'd actually like Dr. Matillo to chime in first and then I'll come to Miss Gordon and Mr. Hershey.

Thanks, Chair Edmonds. Just um was reflecting on um Cher Swanson's comments and the next sentence does reference giving employees an opportunity to contribute. So, I was wondering if if that would help make it clear or maybe we could consider trying to weave the opportunity language into the blue section. And I don't know that we I've got wording for it now, but we could take that back to to make it more clear that it is an opportunity and not a requirement. That was all.

Thank you, uh, Miss Gordon. Um yeah, in in the um the same uh vein that Cher Swanson brought up his concern, I think my concern is around um the second sentence in that second paragraph um where it references um uh appropriate involvement of staff, parents, and and other community members. Who defines what appropriate is? I think that's my question.

There was actually a lot of discussion about what words to use there because, you know, certain staff would have a reason to have input on certain things. So, I was trying to think of a good example. Um, if it's something at the school that only involves staff members, then you may not have to have community involvement. Um, I I can't think of an example right now off the cuff, but there are some examples. So, that we what we're trying to say here is that the staff that would be involved or that would be impacted would have an opportunity to give input. That's what we're trying to capture here. and and so that people

the word appropriate refers to the people who would be impacted or would have a need to give input for that purpose if if I'm making sense with that.

I do I'm sorry followup.

Yes, go ahead, Miss Gordon.

Um I do understand that. However, I I am concerned that that is really vague and that's really up to the interpretation um especially principles. Um, and so while I I don't at this moment have a um something to offer to to change it, um, I just I would love to hear others perspectives around that appropriate involvement because to me that sounds very vague and and leadership can use it at their discretion.

Okay. Um, Mr. Hershey,

uh, thank you. I want to I have two two items. Um and I'm kind of piggybacking on what Miss Gordon said. I'm I'm not really sure or I'd be curious to know is how are we ensuring that this sort of um process and procedures are taking place in school system in the school itself. As far as uh staff being able to weigh in, I actually agree with the way Chair Swanson read it too, especially in the first paragraph where it said school system employees will be asked to help. And you know, when you're asked to help by your boss or somebody higher up, there's an obligation that comes, you know, you almost feel obligated. So I I a different part of the policy um that he was referencing but I felt what he was saying. And the last thing is I guess the first paragraph is is that supposed to be like the school board asking and the second paragraph is the

principal or a school asking because they're seem to say the exact same thing the way I read it. The first paragraph is more broad and then the second paragraph is more specific to the operation of schools.

It's okay. I it just kind of says the same thing to the way when because you talk about procedures and divi, you know, and then in the second paragraph you talk about procedures and so it's

the broadness and then the specificity is

kind of one and the same to me. But those are the points that I was raising.

Um, I'd like to ask Dr. Matillo and Dr. Taylor to chime in and I will get to Dr. Ing and Chair Swanson after that. So, um, Dr. Matillo,

I'm sorry that was my hand from the first time. It was really

Oh, no worries. Yeah,

Dr. Taylor,

thank you, Madam Chair. I do want to add that um part of this policy is really about making sure that staff have an opportunity to give feedback and input when it comes to decision making. Um I will add uh and and Julie and Neil you can help me on this that I know that we do have policy that governs the involvement of let's say uh BTS or staff that are in their last three years. So um if that's something you wanted to be able to put in you could certainly do that. Uh going back to what Carla talked about in terms of issue specific items, I think um you know that would be looking at if we're talking about uh a change to how we do lesson plans at the school level and that wouldn't necessarily involve uh bus drivers or cafeteria staff or admit or something of that nature. Um and so um I do think uh the word appropriate involvement also will help guide uh how that um um lead person particularly in this case the principal

looks at who they involve in in the decision making. And so I I do appreciate the concern about staff being overly taxed. Uh but that's how I view that word appropriate that um that is what the uh the lead is responsible for knowing and understanding what the policy says about how they involve but also really giving them the opportunity to give feedback. Um and and Carla you can add to this. I think that is the intent of this policy overall is to make sure that they have an opportunity to give feedback when many cases they may not have been consulted. Uh so I think we can take all of these things in consideration.

Yes sir. And then um just as Dr. Taylor was saying in the first sentence of that paragraph that's referring to schools. The second paragraph is referring to schools. Um it says the administrators shall seek suggestions of those employees who will be affected by such provisions. So the word shall means that administrators must seek suggestions from the employees that are impacted. And that alleviates some of the choice for administrators of who they're go who they're going to ask or include because they have to include anyone who is directly impacted by the decision. For example, the lesson plans. Um, thank you Dr. Taylor. That was a great example where it's a very specific group of people that would be impacted by that decision and therefore the administrator shall seek um suggestions and input. And then as Dr. Matillo is saying in the third sentence, employees given the opportunity helps with some of the other concerns, but but I like the suggestion of maybe including opportunity in more places in the in the blue section or you know the blue section we did bring over from 3030 and 3040 and if we we don't prefer to

have that in the policy then we wouldn't have to add that but we were bringing it over from a current policy. and um incorporating into this this paragraph for that reason. But um

okay, thank you um Dr. Ing and then to Miss Gordon and then to um Vice Chair Hagerty. So Dr. Ing, go ahead.

All right. Thank you. Um I guess this is part of the reason why we revisit policies is so that we can re-examine uh you know what has been uh in in writing and see whether we can improve upon it. Um I I think you know I I was reading into you know the the the words and I'm not a wordssmith. Um and I know seeing the word will uh in the first paragraph that the school system employees will be asked and then on the second paragraph um as needed employees will be given that and maybe that's where uh chair Swanson has um felt like there is a volunt uh in those two um uh sections um and you know I don't know if it you know that school system employees uh can be asked or uh uh are given opportunities to help uh something to that effect. You know just uh I'm open to other people's suggestions. Thank you.

Uh Miss Gordon and Chair Swanson, I see your hand as well. Miss Gordon.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I'd like to offer some words. Um, after the part where it says appropriate involvement, if we could add um something like um meaning timely, meaningful and clearly

communicated opportunities for input. Um and then another option would be such as opportunities to provide input through committees, surveys, meetings or advisory groups from staff, parents, community members and students. Um to me that like clearly defines what appropriate involvement um would mean, but I think it's it's for me it is entirely too vague for it to just say appropriate involvement. Could you repeat that language again so that I can copy it in? Type it in.

Sure. Sure. Well, I had two. So, the first one is meaning timely, meaningful and clearly communicated opportunities for input. Um and then another one would be such as opportunities to provide input through commu committees, surveys, meetings or advisory groups. and both capture that like opportunity the the wording for it to be it's an opportunity not a volunte um I would I would either add it to after the wording where it says appropriate involvement I would e either add both of those phrases. Um I think one is a little bit more detailed in what involvement includes. Um I think the first one really um defines uh it's it might be vague too like around

timing.

Sure. Now if you could I know this is the third time. Tell me the last um inclusion again.

It's okay.

I apologize.

No, no worries. Such as opportunities to provide input through committees, surveys, meetings, or advisory groups. And board members, I know it it might be at least it's hard for me to see. I do see it, but um Dr. Crane is typing on the document that is on the screen. If you want to follow along, she's got it in purple. Um, Vice Chair Hagerty and then Mr. Chair Swanson. Sorry, I was trying to use Zoom commands in Teams and it wouldn't unmute me. Um, thank you. Really, Miss Gordon's change addresses a lot of what my comment was. You know, I want us to to to zoom back a little bit and just the the whole policy, the whole reason for the policy was to encourage and to beyond courage to require principles to solicit input from staff. Right? And that's why some of the words that people have pointed out, the shalls and the wills were important because if we didn't have shall and will, when we looked at this policy years ago, the thought was, well, it's just really advice or suggestions to principles and that principles wouldn't have to provide any opportunities for this kind of feedback. So having it as a policy, having shall and having will were important. So that you know in that power structure of administrator to school employees the administrator had to have these opportunities built in.

They couldn't just you know ignore it. Um so if there were concerns about how that uh feedback was provided, I think that's really where to focus and I think Miss Gordon has provided some good suggestions for how to improve that. So, I'm happy with the amendment and I would support the policy.

Chair Swatson,

thank you. And I want to thank my colleagues for, you know, supporting what I would raised initially and and to Miss Gordon for cleaning this up because I I think Mr. Heerty answered my question because I was kind of curious to know what is the spirit of this policy when these practices should be taking place in schools. Um, and it's a culture thing. So whether that's through a school improvement uh committee which they can create cultures um I I I I'm just concerned that it would take a policy to actually move the needle on this but um I I too can support the language and the policy as it is written. In the beginning I was not going to be able to support it. Um, but I would love to know for since we're bringing policies back, how do we connect this back to the um to this to the school school improvement plans to see where this work is being done? And I guess this is uh more of a directive to the superintendent to to allow us to trace or not to trace to document it how the policies are working and if it's not working, you know, what do we need to amend it? And then in addition, I would like to see how this changes some of the trajectory in the teaching working condition surveys that are done. Is it bianually or every other year? Um, every other year with the teacher working condition survey, but uh uh as far as the school improvement process is involved. Uh I think you hit key on that that uh there's specific involvement uh that requires teacher input. uh but

other policies and governance in the in the school uh the principal may not necessarily have to seek that and so I think this would be addressing those issues where it's not clearly defined like the school improvement process

well I guess it should be a standard across the board and so if those folks are not necessarily doing this how are those principles being held accountable um because I think policy is all about accountability and this is how we change those teaching working condition surveys um which sets the tone of how principles are doing in their job, what are what are the culture of their buildings? And so I would love to see how this is all connected back in the data from that. Um will there be is the teaching working condition surveys released this year or is it next year?

I used to know when I was in the classroom.

Uh AJ, is that coming out this year or Carla?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it comes out this year.

Okay, gotcha. So I would love to see how we can you know mirror some of that data and and pilot that in for those principles that are doing the work that did not need a policy. How do we elevate the conditions that they're doing in their schools so it can be a roadmap for all other principles who you know not necessarily saying that they're negating this but are juggling with many things and this is something that's not a priority in their in their purview at the moment. So I would just love to see some comparisons on that.

Absolutely. And I'll say that it would require multiple measures. Uh certainly the the working condition survey is one way that we can get feedback and data, but then uh we want to look at other data points as well. So great point.

Uh Miss Gordon,

thank you, Madam Chair. I I do apologize. I just wanted to add to my um my suggestion that we also put in there clearly communicated Um so after let me see meaningful meaning timely meaningful opportunities or maybe meaning timely meaningful and

clearly communicated opportunities for input.

Thank you.

Okay. What um uh Miss Cfield I do see your um hand up. I'm I'm also watching the time and I know that because of me we started a little bit late because of my technical issues. So, um once we get uh Miss Cawfield's uh question or comment, what I'd like to do is to ask the motion for this to come to the action agenda for the next board meeting so that we can capture this word smithing that we've done. And just in case, you know, there's um other questions or discussions um or slightly other word smithing that needs to happen. Um but Miss Cfield, go ahead.

Thank you. Um I um I I do agree that I at first I was trying to understand the tone of the policy and where we were trying to get. Um it it does seem like it would be expected that we would have these things. So appreciate the clarity of changing what that means and and how it's expecting how we expect the principles to do this. The second paragraph where it says um and I understand that she's still kind of making some changes so maybe this will will still be changed. It says the principal of each school or site is authorized to define how decisions are made. Um, for me, when I hear the word authorized, it means that they're allowed to versus we're expecting them to. So, isn't the whole uh point of the paragraph to say that we're really expecting the principles to kind of open this communication so that we do have this input available? I just feel like the word authorize is

kind of leaving it like as it's still optional because we're allowing them to where we would kind of expect that they would. Miss Cfield, I think that's an interesting question. Um, and I'm I'm gonna say that one of the historical contexts of the policy that preceded it, 3040, 4040, um, was adopted in 1991. Um, and in 1991, there was a big push from the state legislature for sitebased decisionmaking and sightbased management. Um, and at that point in time, I think the language, and I'll I'll default to Neil here because he'll know more of the um the legal history here than I do, but I think the point of the policy and the point of the statutes at that time were to authorize principles at schools to make these kind of decisions, not that those decisions were being there was a real intention to return that to sitebased management rather than central centrally uh based management, right? Um, so whether we use keep the word authorized or expected, I think I think that's an interesting question. Neil, do you have anything to add on that

or maybe encouraged?

Yeah, sorry to disappoint, but my I was not practicing law in the early 90s, so I I I'd have to look that up to confirm, but I'm sure Julie is right or on the right track. We could say the principal of each school will define how decisions are made at the school or site with appropriate involvement.

I like as well

or expected. Yeah, either one. Expected or will.

All right. Do we think we have everything board members? Okay. With that, can I please get a motion for 7210 to go to action at the

next February board meeting?

So moved. That's

second.

Gordon.

Okay, that's a motion from Miss Gordon, a second from Miss Caulfield. Um, district one I or nay.

Okay. I

District two I.

District three.

I. District four, the chair votes I. District six,

I.

District seven,

District eight and district nine.

Okay. Um, Chair Swanson, we have um 15 minutes. Um, and I wanted to know because we still have one more policy and then we were supposed to have a discussion about the capturing video on campus. Um, would you like for us to move one of those items um to another committee meeting so that we stay on time for work session or go over a little bit? Um, I want to respect what your

So, we have a

because I know we got started late again. My apolog.

Right. And we have a 2:30 start with the work session with two items that will take at least an hour and a half a piece. So, it's up to you um which policies you want to move forward within the 15 minutes.

Okay, no problem. Um I think the discussion of the video on campus might take longer than the um going ahead with uh policy 7422. So, um why don't we do that and move that discussion and if we need to have some of that discussion on work session perhaps, um Chair Swanson and I can get together um to determine if if that if there's time for that um in work session because that was meant to be just a discussion. So, staff, can you please present 7422?

Yes. And so, this is a new policy um for Wake County Public Schools. And you see

in black text that is the schoolboard association recommended uh language and then the blue text represents our changes. So some of the changes there in the title and the first paragraph are just to capture the titles that we use in Wake County. So we just updated the language to include our titles. And then the final sentence in actually paragraph 1 and two, we did a strike through on that because general statute does not actually require that attachment. And um you can see the sentence at the very bottom that we added to address the fact that the executed contract as well as any amendments shall be filed with the superintendent of public instruction. and it is a matter of information and that is required um for us to do that through general statute. So we just switched that to meet the requirements of general statute. And then um in the second paragraph again you see some title changes so that it matches what we currently do. and see what else. I think that represents most of the changes. Oh, we did the strike through at the beginning of the third paragraph because we already listed those previously. Okay, board members, any questions? All right. Seeing none, is there a motion to put 7422 on the consent agenda for the next February board meeting?

A motion to put board policy 7422 on the consent agenda for the uh February 17th board meeting.

Is there a second?

Thank you, Dr. Ing. Um, all in favor, please vote I. District one.

District two. Oh, thank you. District two.

I.

District three.

District four. Chair votes I. District six.

District seven.

District eight and district nine.

Okay. Um, and staff. Thank you uh again everybody for your patience. I'm going to adjourn the meeting a little early so that we can all have a little bit of a break before we start again at 2:30. Um, thank you everyone.