sex education vs abstinence only statistics
would board members pleasecome to the board table. thank you. would all board membersplease come to the table. [gavel]this february 9, 2017, regular meeting of the fairfaxcounty school board will now
sex education vs abstinence only statistics, come to order. please rise for the pledge ofallegiance, a moment of silence and the performance of thenational anthem by the strings under the direction of nickwalker.
[cheering and applause]thank you very much. mason crest elementary schoolstrings, and thank you to the parents that brought yourtalented children out here tonight to share them with us. i think we have principal ofmason crest brian butler in the audience as well. thank you, mr. butler, forsharing your outstanding students with usthank you for being here
tonight. in order to comply with section2.2d of the board of virginia, it's important for the board tocertify that the closed board meeting on february 9, 2017,only public business matters lawfully exempted from openmeeting requirements and only such public business matters asidentified in the meeting were heard, discussed or consideredby the board during the closed meeting. do i have a motion?
moved by ms. hynes, seconded byms. strauss. all those in favor raise yourhands. hynes, hough, corbett sanders,strauss, evans, moon, mcelveen. all those opposed? all those abstaining? mr. wilson.
and that motion passes. a few announcements before webegin tonight's meeting. item 5.07 audit committeecitizen member appointment item has been moved to the february23rd consent agenda. there are six speakers signed upto address this item. if you would like to review acopy of the agenda and any agenda item being discussedtonight, that information is on the table by the auditoriumentrance. tonight's agenda is available bygoing to schoolboard on the fcps
home page and selecting boarddocs under upcoming school board meetings. the meeting is also be streamedlive online. select school board from thefull menu and click watch live button. please turn off or silence yourcell phones. i now call on ms. chu forannouncements. thank you, ms.
honorablechair. it is crossing guardappreciation day. a state-wide event to say thankyou to the individuals who help students cross the street safelyon their way to and from school were celebrated in fcps. fcpwill observe the day byhonoring the crossing guards who manage the crossings every day. the crossing guards areemployees of the fairfax county police department.
schools and communities can plantheir own crossing guard appreciation day activities torecognize the valuable role crossing guards play in ensuringstudent safety. fcps state school program andthe virginia department of transportation may offer ways toshow your appreciation to a crossing guard in yourneighborhood. chu. now item 2.04, recognition ofcustodian appreciation week. ms.
hynes? thank you very much. this is such a privilege tohonor our custodians. these are the true unsung heroesof our school system, i think. they keep our buildings safe andattractive for our students every day. we don't have to worry aboutthat, no matter the age or, you know, relative state of repairof some of our buildings, knowing that we are beyond wherewe should be in terms of our
renovation cycle sometimes andthese are older buildings that need a lot of work, and we knowhow important their work is for our students and our teachers,and also, i think custodians provide for students every day arole model of caring and hard work in the buildings, and theysee that. they see people giving andworking hard every day. thank you for being here tonightand for all you do. we do have are something i willread, a recognition. the school board recognizes thehard work and unending
dedication of the custodians whowork for fairfax county public schools. our custodians are the firstemployees to arrive in the morning and the last employeesto leave at night. by providing clean and safeschool environments, the custodians at fcps have a directimpact on the educational success of our students. many custodians take additionaltraining leading to certification as professionalcustodians.
the week of february 20-24 hasbeen named custodian appreciation week to recognizeand thank our dedicated custodians whose attention todetail and high standards affect all students, employees, andmany members of the community. at this time, i would like toinvite all of our great custodians who are in theaudience tonight to join us at the desk for a picture with theboard. if i could, mr. moon hasasked to say a few words as
well. thank you, madam chair. i want to extend my specialappreciation and welcome to the school board for the custodians. it brings back memories many,many years ago when my mother was a school custodian. custodians work for their ownamerican dreams as well as american dreams of their ownchildren. thank you for your hard work andwelcome.
all right. and we're actually going to askms. chu to do student. in addition, a lot of usstudents are gearing up with mind matters, as well as theteam has been working on a project to get mental health andwellness clubs started in these so they are getting ready therest of the year to complete ourprojects on mental health awareness by having more clubsand more support groups out in
the schools so i'm happy toannounce all of that today. the next order of business iscitizen participation. tonight, 10 citizens have signedup to address the board, and we also have one video testimony. speakers are requested to limittheir remarks to not more than three minutes. the school board will not hearstatements involving issues that have been scheduled for publichearing such as capital improvement program, budget andboundaries.
complaints regarding individualstudents or school-based employees should be directed tothe appropriate school principal or other official. speakers should refrainpersonally identifiable information with regard to astudent. speakers are expected to respectthe public's business. there are children in theaudience and watching at home so language should be appropriatefor all age levels. thank you for your cooperationand thanks to those who have
come out to speak to us tonight. we're going to call the firstthree names. if you would come down and beready to speak, we appreciate it. the first speaker is elisaminock speaking on the audit committee appointment and annaurman speaking on the award of contract, relocation servicesfor portable classroom trailers. david mika, erfc2001 planmodifications. minock.
hello, my name is elisaminock and i am a freshman. i attended a seminar aboutdiversity on race, religion, and sexual orientation. i was notpreviously aware of this planned lesson or what we were going tobe taught. during the approximately30-minute video, diversity of religion was discussed as wellas the need to respect all races and sexual orientations. the majority of the videocentered around the lgbt
community and how everyone mustbe accepting and inclusive of them. however, i was confused, becausethe lifestyle choices demonstrated in the video goagainst my religious beliefs. i became frustrated because ifelt obligated to sit through a video on sexual orientationwhich i don't believe should be part of our academic teachings. school is where academics shouldbe taught, not lgbt inclinations.
after watching the video, it wasmy impression that the fairfax county school was attempting toforce me to believe in something that doesn't respect my beliefs,and that i had no say in the matter. the whole situation made me feelstressed and uncomfortable. i was raised to have and berespectful of others. i do not need to be told to berespect others. my respect for an individualdoes not mean that i have to approve of their lifestylechoices.
this video was about diversity,and yet it seems as if my rights and beliefs as a catholic arenot respected. i respect the fact that we asamericans can choose to live our lives in a manner that makes usfeel best, but i do not believe that the school should be tryingto force me to accept lgbt beliefs. i received the same feedbackfrom some of my friends, and they also thought that they werebeing forced to approve of the lgbt lifestyle.
i believe that i am not aloneand that many others feel this way. thank you for your time. anna urman. [applause]good evening. thank you, i am anna urman, afairfax county resident, parent of one, soon to be twoschool-aged children here. i am a government procurementsubject matter expert. so this topic is near and dearto me publicly and
professionally. i support the audit committee'swork and believe that the school board owes it to the residentsand taxpayers of this county to have an independent unbiasedmechanism to ensure that our money is wisely directly spentin the classrooms. one learning example where theassessment would be timely and relevant is the recent award ofa five-year contract initially valued at $279,000. the contract is for leadershipdevelopment, where they have
assessors who observeclassrooms, perform leadership training and administrators ofthe schools. at a time when our kids areattending schools in trailers while the same administratorsare in class a new complexes, we cannot afford to waste any moremoney on buffering of the upper echelons. this contract was increased, bythe way, in july 2016 just 10 weeks before superintendentgarza announced that she accepted a job as president andceo of the contractor.
modification was exercised toadd $363,000 more to the second year of the crack. that's over $300,000 more orabout 649% than originally planned for the year. it would be at least naive toassume that the two negotiations were conducted without knowledgeof one another. she is, after all, the incomingceo of that organization. i urge the school board toexamine the findings and results of the 18-month work for theschools, determine whether our
children are reaping therewards, talk to the teachers who aren't getting enoughresources. ask the parents whose kids'programs are being slashed. the board has a duty toreexamine the ethics violations here, both the virginia act2-2-3100 and your own policy 18.1.7 that applies to yourselfand superintendent of schools, specifically prohibited actionsinclude gaining anything of value professional serviceswhile performing professional duties or with the reasonablelikelihood that the
opportunities being offered toinfluence in performance of official duties. garza is in violation ofseveral of these provisions. i urge you for the best interestof the county and our kids to allow an independent, unbiasedaudit committee to examine such expenditures and honestlydetermine whether they're truly in the best interest of ourcommunity. [applause]superintendent, staff, retired and current teachers.
my name is david mika. i have come to speak with youabout your changes proposed to the erfc. my father, walter john mika, aformer employee of the school system. both of my parents, walter andharriet were teachers at fairfax county for a combined 64 years. we lost my mother three yearsago to lung cancer, but teaching in this county and giving thegift of knowledge to its
children was both my parents'calling in life. my father's work extended beyondthe classroom and in service of all teachers and those who camebefore him. he served as a member and a vicechair person of the erfc board and also served in the virginiaretirement system serving one term as the vice chairman. i'm here this evening because myfather cannot. walter, who spent so many of hisyears focusing on the training of young minds, is now forced tohold onto what he can of his
own. he suffers from dementia andalzheimer's. in my mind, an ending that isunfair for anyone. but i've come to ask you tothink about this one retiree and -- the one retiree, yourformer employee, in the context of these three questions. are the changes that areproposed tonight fair and equitable to walter if he wasjust starting his career? i ask you this because at theage of 34, he and others banded
together and worked to bertherfc. even at the young age, my fatherthought of those around him and wanted to make sure that theirlater years they would not have to rely on others, that theycould be comfortable. please stop and think about yourcurrent younger staff who will be impacted by these changes. i ask you to also, as you'reconsidering that, i also ask you to think about the broaderimplications of your actions. i've read varied reports abouthow much these changes may save
fcps. my question is, how will thosesavings that you take from the erfc today be made up for byfuture retirees? where will the funding comefrom? none of us may be able to give adefinitive answer on this, but i stand here to say that takingmoney today is not worth the risk to future employees. and lastly, one of the mostexpensive places in the united states to live, are the changesthat you're considering making
to erfc fair to your employeestoday and tomorrow. if walter was your father,facing the challenges he is, would you make these changes? i'm here today, members of theboard, to stand for my father, his coworkers, fellow teachers,and retirees, because my father and mother worked, slept, andworked as a school teacher. members of the board, i ask youto carefully consider your decision. [applause]thank you.
i have monica cameron speakingon the audit committee appointment. i'm monica cameron. i am the mother of three fairfaxcounty public school students and i am a daughter of aretired, fully funded retired teacher. the topic of the audit committeemember selection was on the agenda when i signed up but hassince then been put on the consent agenda without anydiscussion.
i think this topic is as itrelates -- i think the topic as it relates now to the schoolbudget is important and i am here tonight on on behalf of ofan army of a school of citizens to put the internal audit at thetop of the priorities. citizens expect the school boardnot only to prepare an audit plan but to conduct audits onschedule. and we also expect follow-up andaction taken on audit findings and recommendations. the following are just a fewinstances where the auditor's
findings and recommendationswere not acted upon. in the contract managementaudit, it was sampled that 67% of all contracts are sole force. that means fcps doesn't competeor request for a proposal for solicitation to compete for bestpractice. in the government sector youneed at least three bids and written justification of thesole source. best case scenario, fcps hasjustification for why 67% of its purchases are sole source.
the worst case scenario, we needto know if there are any serious conflicts of interest. i'm a professional contractsadministrator, ask this is irresponsible spending, not abest practice for any organization, especially a $2.7billion organization, and certainly not good stewardshipof taxpayer dollars. number 2, the audit for thecarry-over of ending balance of $144 million needs to be doneimmediately. citizens need assurances thatthe ending balance is not
taxpayer dollars of unrealizedprojects that get turned over as a means to keep holding thefunding. ending balance should bereviewed annually by an independent auditor reporting tothe school board, not an auditor reporting to the superintendentand coo. good stewardship would requirethat funds from a non-contracted project that hasn't beeninitiated within two years should be freed up and used tofund other essential needs, and hey, how about this, teachersalary increases.
many consider that the schoolboard has been fully funded every year, and an independentaudit of the ending balance and the carry-over funds wouldlikely ensure fcps would not have a budget short fall everyyear as it has. number 3, audit of thehealthcare cost valued at $284 million should be done annuallyas do most school systems around the country. research has shown cost savingson erroneous billings and administrative errors havereconciled from 1% to 10% of the
expenses so in our county, thatwould create a cost savings of up to $2.8 million a year. the audit would pay for itselfand leave money for other expenses and, hey, like teachersalary increases. number 4, the facts contractfrom the construction bond audits. most people are unaware thatfcps has a contract with fairfax school to sublet school space touse for the school aged child care program.
remarkably, this contract hasnot been renegotiated in it entirety in 30 years. and even if some of the auditshad been completed in a timely manner. could you wrap up, please. pardon me? could you wrap up, please? yes, ma'am. this is my last two sentences.
even if some of the audits havebeen completed in a timely manner and actions have beentaken by the school board, fcps could have already savedprograms and stopped teachers from leaving to go to othercounties for higher salaries. we love our teachers, and we askthat you do your parts to keep them in fcps by conducting animmediate independent audit of the carry-over funds and endingbalance. [applause]james ruland. good evening, i am jimruland.
thank you for letting me speaktonight about the audit commitment appointment. the relevant regulation says themission of this office is to independently determine whetherthe ongoing processes fiscal and administrative options throughthe fairfax county public schools are adequately designed,functioning in an effective manner, and fully accountable toits citizens. after you revised the regulationin 2012, you added two community members to the audit committee,hired an auditor general, put
her on paid leave after one yearand she and the senior audit manager no longer work for thefairfax county public schools. you just hired an interimauditor general with a background in human resources,not in finance or audit. and our last superintendent leftunexpectedly, just after you renewed her contract. what happened? hard to tell because so manymeetings are done in closed sessions.
fairfax county public schoolstalk about transparency but when push comes to shove,transparency gives way to apostasy. could it be special fraud abuseper management? top-heavy management constantlychasing new fads? are we spending too much time ontransgender regulations determining which terms could beused in k-12, z, zim, zer or zee? my favorite pronoun is yourmajesty.
my wife disagrees. we can get a hint from thecommittees you've been discussing. 1410 says internal controls haveto be practical and conduct is only problematic if it'smeasurable and both substantive and consequential under thecircumstances. other sections limitinvestigations of school board members, the superintendent andother top. why?
regulation 1420 is becoming aschool board policy and you're deleting the section abouthaving two community members and four school board members as theonly voting members. does that mean you intend toreturn to the good old days and put the coo, ceo and cfo back onthe audit committee as voting members? to make sure any potentialinvestigations can be nipped in the bud and dirty laundry kepthidden. what prompted thesechanges?
why did the auditorgeneral and senior audit manager leave. why don't you want requirementsin the revised rules about who can and can't be a voting memberon the audit committee. if you aren't willing to answerthese types of questions, why should the public trust to youmanage the school system's resources? thank you, and that's the end ofmy talk. [applause]zach wojciech.
good evening. my name is zach wojciech and ithank you for this opportunity to speak. i would like to start by statingthat with respect to the audit commitment appointment, isupport auditing the schools, to help improve managementaccountability and protect against abuse and waste. my remarks today were just thewidespread abuse and ways that the illegal extension of policy1450 to include gender identity
will cause. today, tens of thousands offairfax county public school children and their parents andgrandparents, along with thousands of teachers andadministrators are being bullied into accepting that a studentcan change their god-given biological identity from male tofemale or female to male despite it being impossible to changesexes. this unwanted school pressure isnot only an egregious violation of their personal and religiousfreedom but a blatant attack on
common sense. even worse, adding genderidentity would put thousands of students in harm's way. these are the studentssusceptible to consider changing their gender identity when theynever would have otherwise. the power of suggestion byrespected public school administrators and facultycombined with this aggressive intimidation by lgbt activistsand the radical left may be too much for some of them towithstand.
this unwanted pressure isclearly a violation of the personal and religious libertyas well as that of their families. the second horrific impact ofthis proposal is that boys will go into girl's bathrooms, lockerrooms, and even showers and vice versa, when they are clearlyunwanted and in itself is a form of sexual harassment. sexual promiscuity is bound toincrease as boys continue to see girls undress and shower andvice versa.
even worse, the risk of assaultand rape will increase as barriers to protect studentsfrom confused people and those who would take advantage of thesystem are removed. the greatest impact of thisoutreach is the attack on common decency will be on unsuspectedelementary school students. they will be forced toprematurely abandon their childhood and forced to endure alie or be prodded by some of their peers if they don't.the school system is illegally and immorally messing with thehearts of children, 99% of whom
are mentally and physicallyhealthy. lastly, student safety andsecurity will be grossly compromised. allowing boys to go into thegirl's bathrooms or locker rooms will make female students feelunsafe. it would only take one unwantedconfrontation to be seen in the news to scare all public schoolsstudents and their families and cause unlimited financialliability upon the school it should be clear thatextending policy 1450 to include
gender identity will result inthe abuse of all fairfax public school students and theirfamilies. also, tens of millions ofdollars will be wasted to recover administrativemanagement and legal cost so i solemnly urge you to repeal theproposed amendment of extension of policy 1450. thank you very muchthank you. [applause]i have john murray to be followed by tom cranmer to befollowed by erica newsom and
kevin hickerson. murray. thank you for the opportunityto provide some thoughts on the audit committee appointment. an audit is a public asspect --excuse me. could you state your name andwhen you're finished, could you please let our clerk have yourcontact info? sure. my name is karen husselman.
an audit is an important aspectof public accountability. having another person reviewyour activities and comparing them against specific criteriascan be valuable as you have the opportunity for an impartialobserver to give you feedback regarding your work andtechniques and determining if the problems the program wasdesigned to mitigate has been effective. as an example, let's look at thefamily life education program. the fairfax county parent andchild group completed a review
of the program due to continuedinsertion of questionable material into the curriculumover the objections and concerns of some fairfax county parentsand taxpayers. the parent and child growthassessment of the 91 lessons in the current curriculum provided36 opt-out recommendations and 40 caution advisories toparents. in short, the parent and childgrowth assessed that over 40% of the fla program includesobjectionable instruction and another 40% of the instructionis advisory.
that's the public and thecurriculum developed even know why, and this has been sent outto many parents. the fairfax county school boardshould consider appointing people to the audit committeewho are qualified to conduct an independent audit of thecurriculum to include all lessons than improperlytransferred to the health curriculum that deny parents theability to opt out of the instruction. most of all, the audit shoulddetermine the effectiveness of
the fle program and reducingproblems it was established to prevent. as a reminder, the fle programwas started in the late 80s and early 90s to combat teenpregnancy and std s, mostly, hiv and aids. the code of virginia stated theprogram was created to provide instruction for students infamily living and relationships, human sexuality, reproduction,the value of postponing sexual activity.
the goal was to reduce theincidents of pregnancy or stds and substance abuse amongteenagers. in 1999, a legislator addedabstinence. in 2002, adoption is a positivechoice for an unwanted pregnancy. in 2004, that's to avoid sexualassault and avoiding the availability of counseling andlegal resources, in 2007, dating violence. turning back to virginia code,all fle was designed to promote
parental involvement. a qualified audit could alsoinclude engaging of the parents to determine their degree ofparental involvement made readily available. thank you for listening andconsideration of appointing a member of the parent-childorganization of the audit committee to lead an audit ofthe fle program in 2017. tom cranmer to be followed byerica newsom. thank you, madam chairman andboard members.
i appreciate the opportunity ofbeing here with all the parents here and students. the speakers before have beenvery thorough, and provided some really important topics. i hope that the board membersreally listen and take those comments into account. i would like to complimentelizabeth schultz for her comments today on wmal. you can hear them -- if youdidn't hear them this
afternoon -- by going to wmaland listening on their pod cast. she made some really importantpoints. one was the importance of theparental role. people love to talk about, let'sgive more money to the schools. well, the difference inlearning, i think, is primarily 50% because of parents'guidance, and encouragement and certainly having pushy parents. very, very important. in all this discussion, i neverhear of this.
elizabeth talked about criticalthinking. this is really important to beable to analyze things. we seem to be generating anenormous number of kids who can't analyze their way out of apaper bag. they can't understand, forexample, in the discussion about the temporary stay on bringingin immigrants from a handful of countries. this wasn't a muslim thing. it was -- clearly, if anybodybothered to read what was
actually in the order, it saysnothing about muslims. don't have anything againstmuslims. i studied in hamas for threeyears, and it's just important to be able to read as well aswrite and compute, and apparently, the berkeleyuniversity, 47% of the graduates are still living with theirparents in their parents' basement. this is really incredible inthis situation of america. america has a rankinginternationally of only 25 out
of all the countries in theworld. i worked in outer mongolia. the outer mon golians whobasically for the most part live in tents in slums exceed inmathematics and beat practically everybody. why are they succeeding and wearen't? you've got to analyze what'sgoing on. the school board has become theenemy of teachers and the kids and the parents and thetaxpayers.
[applause]i've been asked to remind speakers that if you haven'talready, to please give a copy of your written testimony to theclerk so we can post them. erica newsom. is erica newsom here? president of fea to talk aboutthe erfc 2001 plan modifications. would it be possible for johnnemic to be put on the list if newsom is not here?
okay. i didn't know. i was just asking. i was just askingmadam clerk, do we have anybody signed up? i'm afraid not. i would like to give john nemicsome of my time to speak. my name is john nemic, thepresident of firefighters iaf2068.
on behalf of 1900 members istand here in full support and solidarity of my sisters andbrothers in education labor. when is enough enough? since the great recession,public employees, teachers, firefighters, police officersand the like have taken it on the chin, elected officials,political pundits, and many others have blamed us for theinterruption of our nation's growth and economic future. tell that to a family wherefirefighters and paramedics just
saved a life. a teacher working tirelesslywith a special needs child or a police officer who just removedchildren from an abusive household. because the mills tax did notpass, don't balance the school budget on the backs of ourteachers. have a plan. get the impact before you passany changes to the teachers' pension system.
what you're proposing thisevening would be a major setback not only to the pension systemoverall, but more importantly, to future employees, teacherswho are going to have a major influence with shaping ourchildren, the world's future. both of my daughters are aproduct of the fairfax county public school system, and i'mproud of that. my youngest daughter isfinishing up her masters degree at george washington universityin school counseling. put that with what you'reproposing this evening would
most certainly affect her futureshould she decide to apply for employment with fairfax county. vote no on this proposal to thechange to erfc. [cheering and applause]can't say it better than john, and you know our position,and we put a petition out and we got stories. we gather a lot of them, and wegot a lot of them from the non-vested employees that youplan to make changes to. one employee said that the fcpsboard plan to modify the
benefits is extremely upsetting. i have accepted a lower incomethan i have had in prior 30 years, spent significant timeand money to obtain a teaching license, refresh my math skillsand knowledge and masters in education. spent far more in contract hoursto do a good job for my students and school with the expectationof a reasonable retirement benefit. now because i find i have fouryears accrued at the conclusion
of this year, the board feels atliberty to renege on the benefits after i have honored myobligation to my students, my school and fcps. this does not promoteengagement. i consider this plan ofmodifying erfc to be a direct violation of the agreement ientered into with fcps. another teacher said, i lost myhusband four years ago and began teaching for fairfax countypublic schools. it's difficult to start a newcareer later in life.
i am very worried about wheni'll ever be able to retire and how i'll be able to take care ofmyself in the future as a non-vested employee. these are your employees. these are the stories, hands offour erfc. [cheering and applause]thank you. we have one video testimony fromdarrell richards also on erfc. my name is darrell richardsand a teacher at woodson high school.
i have three things i ask you toconsider when considering the changes to the erfc pensionplan. the first one is what cpishould be used. you can either use a nationalcpi or a local cpi. the fairfax county cpi uses alocal plan. it includes both west virginiaand all of virginia as a state, not just the d.c. metro area,which would likely actually have a higher low rate of inflationthan all of those states combined.
now, that brings us to the nextquestion which is should you change the cola at all? retirement benefits benefit thelocal economy in which the retiree lives, because theyactually will spend the money there, which then benefits theeconomy. it's best for us to keep theretirees in fairfax county, which is hard to do, because ourcost of living is so high in fairfax county. the 3% cola helps them to beable to stay here in fairfax
county. and keep the local dollars inthe county. which then brings us to my lastconcern, the rule of 90 amendment. i understand the reason for therule of 90 amendment which would be to actually bring us more inline with the vrf pension plan but the thing to notice there isthat vrf has a early retirement eligibility of 60 and 5 years ofservice. also that rule of 90 would thentrump the other part of the erfc
retirement, which is 60 and fiveyears of service. please take that intoconsideration when you consider that amendment. and i do hope you have a goodday. that concludes our citizenparticipation. thank you for everyone who cameout tonight. we go to item 4.01, confirmationof action taken in closed this is the portion of themeeting where the board will confirm any action taken inclosed meeting.
this may include studentdisciplinary matters. board members have discussedeach individual case and at this time, we'll make several motionsto confirm the recommended action. i call on ms. hynes for thefirst motion i move to deny the schoolrealignment appeal of a student who possessed a drug at school. is there a second?
second the motion. seconded by mrs. all in favor of the motion raiseyour hand. hynes, palchik. strauss is here. schultz. sanders, strauss, moon, derenakkaufax and mcelveen. all opposed or abstaining? mclaughlin and wilson.
that motion passes. i call on mrs. strauss for amotion. i move to terminate theemployment of a specific employee identified in closedsession. second. seconded by ms. hynes. all those in favor raise yourhand.
that's hynes, palchik, hough,schultz, corbett sanders, strauss, moon, derenak kaufaxand mcelveen. all opposed, all abstaining. evans, mclaughlin and wilson. we turn to item 4.02 erfc planmodifications. call on mr. moon with themotion. i move that the school boarddraft the trustees to implement the following erfc planmodifications, effective july 1,
2017. all erfc members, 1, loweringthe interest crediting rate on erfc member accounts from 5percent to 4 percent. erfc 2001 members hired on orafter july 1, 2017, and non-vested members as of june30, 2017. 2, instituting a minimumretirement age of 55. 3, increasing the period forcalculating the final average salary from three years to fiveyears. 4, changing the cost of livingadjustment to equal 100 percent
of the consumer price index witha cap of 4 percent and present to erfc 2001 amended plandocuments to the school board for approval by june 2017. moon, would you like tospeak to your motion? just briefly, madam chair. i understand that there will bea motion to postpone at which i intend to support, even though iam fully prepared to vote on the main motion. i also want to respect thedesire of several board members,
the colleagues of mine, who wantmore time and more information to make an informed decision,which is why i will be supporting the motion topostpone later on. but i saw -- i am not going toaddress the merits or demerits of the main motion itself thisevening, but i want to explain to the public how we got to thispoint. about a year ago, the schoolboard, the school system hired a consultant to conduct a studywhich benchmarked fairfax county public schools retirementbenefit levels to surrounding
school divisions, and fairfaxcounty governments in which the federal governments, there wasan effort to support increasing employee salaries and improvethe sustainability of the fcps supplementary retirement programcalled erfc. and in may of last year, erfcpresented the history of fairfax county school systems retirementprograms, along with the key provisions of the existingplans. and at that time, the consultantwas presented erfc options for possible future consideration,and in july of last year, to be
exact july 21, the school boardconsidered the benefit impact of various options, including thoseelements which are part of tonight's main motion. and after that, we have threemore -- four more work sessions. it was september and novemberand december and finally, in january of this year, the schoolboard to discuss what the consensus main motion and erfcmodifications should be, and what i read as the main motionwas the consensus motion by the board.
again, i'm not going to addressthe merits and demerits of the main motion itself but i will besupporting to postpone. i have nothing to add. moon, for yourdetailed chronology on what has happened to bringitous thispoint. i'm going to call on ms. palchik for a privileged motion,ms. palchik. thank you, yes.
i move to postpone furtherdiscussion on the motion until april. do i have a second? corbettsanders. palchik, would you like tospeak to your motion? yes, thank you, i will try.and i appreciate my colleagues who have been patient with ms. corbett sanders and i and thisreally last minute decision to postpone a final decision.
while the initial understandingwhen we began discussions -- and there have been many, as mr. moon explained -- was that thedecision to make any changes to the erfc needed to occur at thistime by february. we have spoken to staff andthey've informed us that we indeed can postpone the decisionand make the proposed changes if we choose to in april. this will allow us to receivefurther information from the erfc board which i believe willbe asked for today, and i will
support that, and to havediscussions with those who would be affected by those changes. this does not mean that we willor will not make proposed changes at that time. this means that we have theability to have a better understanding of what the finalbudget transfer will be from the and to discuss the variousoptions in a more wholistic manner that depend on ourbenefits. so salary and our full benefitspackage, including pensions and
healthcare. to be clear, i think it'simportant that we need to ensure for our children that wecontinue to recruit and retain the best staff in our county,and we are in tight times, and these are difficultconversations. so in order to ensure that andto give ourselves the time to receive information aboutshort-term and long-term possibilities and the costs andbenefits of those to our system, i do ask that my colleagues tojoin ms.
corbett sanders and iin postponing further conversation on decisions thatcould have huge impacts on our staff and our system. that being said, i do hope thatwe're able to ask the follow-on motions in whatever manner theyhappen, should this motion pass, that ms. hough and ms. hynes willbe asking of the erfc board because i think it has come tolight more recently since we had
our initial conversations, thatthere may be additional data or alternative options that we havenot been able to look at. so to be clear, this is apostponement until april, which is after the march 31st deadlineof a request that may be coming after this for information fromour erfc board. mrs. corbett sanders, wouldyou like to speak to your second? yes, please.
palchik, thank you for yourwork. such hard work and diligence onthis. because what this decision wouldmean is that we have the time to collect more information and tomake more informed decision making. i know that there is acommitment amongst this board to continuously look at ourprocesses and look at our way of doing things to improve and sothere are some additional areas of information that people wantto gain additional information,
but there's also continueddialogue that needs to take place, both amongst ourselvesand with the community. we are committed to ensuringthat the -- that all of our staff are given acompetitive -- really a competitive benefits packagethat includes salary and benefits. we need to look at this in acomprehensive way. we also have to look at this inthe bigger context of the budget that we know is going to be atough budget season.
so i welcome having a bit moretime in postponing this decision until after march 30. mclaughlin. i appreciate the hard workthat several of my colleagues have done in trying to find thebest approach to a very complicated decision, and wecertainly as a board have benefitted from the input thatwe received from boeing our current employees, our retiredemployees, in helping us understand how a broad changecan mechanic individual lives so
i certainly appreciated that. i did want to just have a littlemore clarity myself as a board member, as well as i think forthe public. and it goes to the point thatms. palchik raised, thatoriginally, the board was directed that we really neededto make a decision now, here in early february. and now, we've come to learnjust recently that we can push this out until april.
so i would really appreciate ifi only learned about this today. can someone help me betterunderstand why we now have almost two more months. i mean, what changed that'senabling us to push this out for another two months, given that ilook at tonight, which is always a very difficult time for ustrying to prepare an advertised budget to send over to the boardof supervisors. so having two substantialdecisions before the board is always something we're trying toavoid.
so i would like dr. lockhart, ifsomeone or on your staff could just explain to me how do wesuddenly realize that we've got some breathing room here,because i think that's important to understand when ms. corbettsanders, you talked about process. to me, this is a process whatwe're doing here tonight. i could try to address that.
since we heard from the boardback in december, we did initiate the work to make thesystem changes, and in order to meet that requirement, eventhough the vote won't take place in april, we will continue to godown the path of that work, so that in april, if the board doesvote to make the changes, we'll be ready for july 2018, but ifthe board decides not to make changes, we'll have to stop ourwork at that time. we have to continue to do thework, or else we won't be ready for july 2018 implementation.
i appreciate that explanation,and i do recognize that, in other words, you're sortof -- the train going down the track right now but at somepoint, we can divert the train or stop the train and go adifferent direction, but you're trying to get the necessarysteps in place if needed. but i would just say that thenas a board, we would probably do better by getting that claritysooner and i think if we also had a sense that we werereaching this point of starting to be concerned about thisfebruary deadline, i think we
would have been better off tohave communicated that sooner than tonight. so i do plan to support thedelay. i have shared with my colleaguesduring our numerous work sessions on this issue, that ithink it's most important that we continue to review this issuein the broader context of what the county government employeeshave. i just feel that there needs tobe equity and fairness and so as we continue to have thisconversation, should the board
delay tonight, then i would askour retired employees, our current employees, to not onlystay engaged in this put let's look at that message of how wecan have equity and fairness in our benefits package betweenwhat the county offers its employees and what we offerhere, and finally, i also want to say to ms. corbett sanders, iappreciate that you had another amendment on the table that iwas feeling was important, which was to remove the non-vestedemployees from being affected,
so it would only be newemployees that would be affected. and so to those of you in theaudience who are those non-vested members, i thinkthere is many of us that recognize how this change, formany of who you have already devoted up to four years ofservice to our school system, we're finding this to be a verydifficult prospective change. so i encourage you to keep yourvoices strong on this until the board makes a final decision.
hough. so i have a question about themotion. if we were to postpone untilapril, presumably, we'd come back to a work session; is thatthe plan? madam chair, i have a pointof order. yes? a point of order. this is a subsidiary motion. it's got to either be postponedindefinitely or postponed
definite, and april is notdefinite. so as i hear ms. hough beginningher question, that raises the point of order that this is noteither to an indefinite postponement, nor is it to atime definite. so could madam clerk orfoster, have you reviewed the language of this amendment tosee if it's -- to see -- it says discussion in april. right.
rules, as ms. schultz indicates,speaks to postponing definitely or postponing indefinitely. indefinitely means --indefinitely means just if there's no date identified. but definitely -- and so myrecommendation would be rather than having just april that youspecify a date. and that would be fullyconsistent with roberts rules. i think that it does raisequestions as ms.
schultz hasidentified. if it just says april, is thatsufficiently definite? so ms. palchik, would youwant to amend your motion to give us a date certain to makeit comply with what our counsel is --yes, if i can speak to -- originally, the datechosen was april 6th, that would allow ample time for the march 1deadline. the concern was having aworksession in there.
and so i think it would be verydifficult for staff to get us all of this information in timefor the march work session to have this discussion april 6. so a possibility would be, a, tohave it on april 6th. but then to have the worksession on april -- as new business on april 20th worksession, discussion and the april 27th meeting for a vote. if we do not need to go back tonew business. but your motion doesn'tinclude any of that, so i think
what we're looking for is a datecertain that we would be voting on on this --and madam chair, i mean, it could be -- without a date, itcould say the second regular business meeting in april. that is definite and conforms toparliamentary procedure and would allow us to take a vote ona motion it's still the same concernso i'm happy to say april 6 and if we realize that we need topostpone it to april 27 because we need that work session, i cando that.
i think we can pick april 6. that's fine. i want to make sure that we havea work session before the vote. well, if that's the case, ourmarch work session is extremely full as is our entire march. so i would suggest a later datethen in april. so --yeah, so let's say april 27. so by april 27th, so madamclerk, could you put up on the screen.
right now, this is ms. palchik'smotion, so she has to be all right with this. the april 27th regular meeting. but that suggests we won't havefurther discussion. i'm sorryto be so picky. but if you're going to have --how about april 6? excuse me. hang on a second.
i have a lot of people who wantto say a lot of things, but i think i'm going to go back tomr. foster and say i think youunderstand what ms. palchik istrying to do here. so can you help us with thelanguage? if we're going to discuss it ata work session, we can't say we're delaying the furtherdiscussion. so what would be the appropriatelanguage to do what ms. palchikis trying to --
i want to make a point ofpersonal privilege. i suggest we take a five-minuterecess. personal privilege is notdebatable. you're moving this as amotion? we're going to be in recessfor five minutes while we discuss this with legal counsel. we are back in session now. thank you, everyone. palchik is going tosubstitute a new motion for her
previous motionyes, thank you for your patience. i move to postpone the motionuntil the april 27th regular corbett sanders. do you have anything additionalto say? i do not. corbett sanders? it's been said. with that, we'll go back to theorder, so now we're back to mrs.
thank you for your patience,mrs. april 27. does this motion leave adefinitive place for a work session? i can answer that question. that's one of the reasons thatwe're doing this because we may very possibly have to go intoapril for the next work session. because our march is very full. so we are guaranteeing a worksession?
i will schedule a worksession. if we postpone it and it's thewill of the board which i'm sensing it is the will of theboard for a work session particularly, if we areasked -- if you have a motion after this, if that were -- ifyour motion is approved after this, then we would need tobring that back as well. i think it's absolutelymandatory if this passes that a work session happens. i'll just put that out there.
i guess i want to know from ms. quinn, is there a drop-dead datewhere we do have to make a decision? if things got postponed pastapril 27, are we running into -- when are we running intoa we can't do anything? i think if we wait until theend of april to take action, like i mentioned earlier, wewill continue to do the work in the system, so i think we'reokay at that time frame and obviously, we have to make thedecisions before we adopt the
2018 budget, which is the secondbusiness meeting in may. in may. and so then that leads me toask what information are we bringing forward to this worksession? and i still have outstandingincome steps from our september work session on erfc that havenothing to do with the motion on the table, but i guess i'mconfused as to what we're committing to discuss the scopeof what we're going to discuss, and the responsibility to answerother unanswered work sessions
on this plan. so how are we going to determinethe discussion topics for that work session? madam chair. who's that question directedto? i guess the maker of themotion. so i think there are severalquestions that had been posed and more information we wouldlike to receive. one being the follow-on motionsthat you and ms.
hynes willpresent. me being any more in benefitsthat we can get. we have heard from our formerand current employees and i think we would like to be ableto have more conversations and discussion with them that isbased on, you know, the short-term costs to them andlong-term costs to them and to our system. so i -- i've made this motion. i think it is open and i hope towork with the chair if this were
to pass into our members of theboard as to what information we would like to discuss. i don't know if ms. corbettsanders has additional information on thatwell, i'd like to continue with the order in which peopleare speaking, so ms. hough, ifyou have -- well, i mean, i think that asa board, we need to direct staff as to exactly what we expectwhich in my mind would include
outstanding next steps which ihave -- i've seen posted since system, and not answered, butthen also, is there going to be a direction to reach out to theemployees, and are we giving them options to talk about andweigh? i just think that we have a lotof things to consider and i'm not exactly sure what we'reasking so i'll leave it at that for my colleagues to comment on. so i have another question forms. quinn.
if we were to not delay tonight,and we were to vote on either the amendment or the main motionitself, is it not also possible as of april we could pull thosechanges if we got more information in march orthereafter that led us to not wanting to make those changes? i want to make sure iunderstand your question, ms. you're asking on the erfc motionbeing postponed until april, right? no, i'm asking, if we were tonot delay and we were to go
forward with the main motion,and then in april, we decided because of the information wewere given or anything else we have received since then, if wewant to pull that change that we were to make tonight if we wereto make a change tonight, is that possible? so i just want to make sure iunderstand the scenario. the scenario is things wereapproved tonight, right? let's just say main motion. main motion is approved, andthen later this spring and
april, the board makes adecision essentially not to implement those changes? correct. the question is, can you alldo that? yes. i think that roberts rule,certainly, there's a process or motion to reconsider what wasapproved, and -- you know, a related point is that undervirginia law, school boards and boards of supervisors, you alldon't do line item
appropriations or lump-sumappropriations. bottom-line number that'sapproved as part of the advertised budget. it's up to the administrationboard to determine once you get that budget approved by theboard of supervisors. so that's also relevant to yourquestion. so to sum it up, i think thatyou could, after you've proven to not, you would have theability to go back, it would be complicated, and there wouldhave to be a motion to
reconsider an action previouslytaken can -- and rescind it. it wouldn't be the easiestprocess but there is a process under roberts rules in which youcan do that. i guess i'm not sure why it'scomplicated that way and not complicated this way. we have put in -- thesuperintendent has put it in the proposed budget, and basically,by this delay, we are going to be directing it be taken out of,i assume, to be taken out of the proposed budget, if we have notgiven it the direction for it to
be in the proposed budget; isthat correct? well, that would be aquestion i would have. so it's an answer i'd likebefore i decide. so thank you, steve. let me see if i could find this. our thinking was that becauseyour advertised budget -- we can't ultimately adopt a budgetthat's greater than your advertised budget, becauseyou're advertising a certain budget, right?
so even though the reductioncurrently is included in the superintendent's budget, and ifyou adopt the advertised with those reductions in it, and thenlater on when you postpone this action, let's say you takeaction in april and decide not to do any changes, you arecommitting yourself to make reductions of $4.7 million tobalance the budget before you adopt it for the approved inmay. right, but i understand. that's something we do all thetime.
that in and of itself is notcomplicated. that's just a burden to do onthe maker of a motion, to find the dollars that you'resuggesting we take out or put in. correct, the maker and theboard as a whole. so if you're passing the motionto postpone, you are now committing the board to reducethat budget by $4.7 million if the action in april is not to goforward with the changes. and we'll be changing the ask onthe proposed budget if we delay
the motion tonight. and i think our thinking is youdon't have to reduce it tonight. we know we don't have toreduce it, but we're going to be increasing our ask. no, you're committingyourself to making that reduction if you don't vote forit in april. i'm sorry. so the budget will stand as iswith dr. lockhart'srecommendations for this change?
that's all for me to think onthat. schultz, have you alreadyspoken, or you were on the list. do you still want to be on thelist? my on the list wasn't theanother. go ahead. i was triggered by ms. houghto ask a parliamentary, and i'm glad we got that straight, sothat we have an in-order motion. let me follow up with quinn onthat question, because that's
kind of a little bit where istand. typically, in plain speak, wehave amendments posted days in advance, and we talk to eachother trying to figure out how we do the business of the boardand where we are on votes and things, and this just came up. so if we seem a littledishevelled with people, there's a reason why, because we didn'texactly know what this would mean and what the implicationsare for the motions already developed.
so that's really my question,because if there is a motion to delay and we don't act asadvertised in our motions this evening, effectively, we aretaking no action on the erfc and there's 4.7 million that is inthe budget for which there is no accounted action of the board. is that what i'm understanding? at the time that you approvethe advertised, it includes those actions, right? but we haven't actually takenthe actions.
because the whole reason theerfc is on the agenda where it is this evening was because wewere supposed to take action on erfc prior to the budget. there's a reason that the agendais ordered the way it is. if we effectively skip thisportion of the agenda, we're moving into a budget that is setforth in such a fashion that the action that we needed to takeearlier in the agenda on erfc to put in order, the budget, is nownot being taken. so the cleaner way to do itwhen you adopt the advertised
budget, is you could have anamendment that says increase the cost associated with erfcchanges, and make the reductions somewhere else in the budgetand see, this is the difficulty of a motion like thisat the last minute. that's really what should havebeen contemplated prior to us coming to the table. it sounds to me that that's theonly way that the rest of the order of the business of theboard is actually in order because we're talking aboutdoing something that's a
successive item on our agendanow doesn't contemplate. so i actually don't know howwe're in order for the rest of the evening, if the budgetdoesn't follow what we may do, which is to defer. i'll speak just briefly to thedeferring. i think there has to be somecontemplation on that side of the -- that's not the daes. i don't know what that is. the galley.
over what's about to happen onthe next agenda item, mr. fosterand quinn, i don't know if y'all need to get together on that. i do support a delay, i think. i think i could support a delay. there are some substantive itemsthat i think are outstanding, even though we've talked aboutthis a lot. i appreciate thegentleman -- and i'm sorry, i know he's from woodson and ithought he was going to come
back on -- who spoke whounderstood some of the questions that i was asking about aligningerfc on a rule of 90, and i originally had that as aamendment to the erfc motion, and then decided to delay it toask for more information. anything that gives this boardeffective information to help us in executive decision making,complex executive decision making like this i think isbeneficial, so i imagine that that motion will pass later. it's unfortunate that we'vearrived at sort of what i feel
is sort of a hinky agenda at thelast second because it doesn't feel like we're being very cleanin our work, and i'm not sure how the rest of the agenda goes,so that's my struggle is that on the one hand, i agree. i think we should spend somemore time talking to employees. i think we should solicit moreinformation from the erfc board of trustees, and should directstaff to provide us more information on paths ofmanagement to reduce the costs that come with the erfc.
i feel a little bit like thereis a message somehow that the motions before the board wouldaffect existing retirees. i don't know where that camefrom but maybe that's our fault that we haven't effectivelycommunicated. nothing we're contemplatingwould affect any existing retirees. in fact, the budget motion ihave would actually benefit you because it would be betterfunded. i guess i'll support a delay buti think there's a big asterisk
next to that based on whateveranswer comes from our friends in gallery would be better. i would support the delay. however, i do think it isappropriate that we are looking at our pension system. we need to balance manydifferent aspects of up-front paid intentions and benefits andall the rest of that, which is why we asked for the study inthe first place. depending on what decision wemake in april, when it comes
back in april by that time, weobviously will know what our revenues will be. those at this decision will haveto be made in the context of revenue from both the state andthe counties, and as we work through the various otheramendments tonight, i am not agreeable to ask for more moneyfrom the board of supervisors than the bottom line that isasked now, which means that we already -- well, we would haveto make adjustments, depending on what we decide to do inapril.
so at any rate, i will vote forthe delay. i know my colleagues would liketo have a little more time to discuss this, and we certainlywant to make sure we are informed in the best waypossible. hynesthank you. i want to thank ms. this was hard to do on the lastday. thank you for trying thoughbecause i think as everyone can see we are still trying tofigure out what to do about
this. i'll support the delay. i think the value of postponingfor me through what ms. strausswas talking about, i seriously considered ms. corbett sanders'proposed amendment for tonight that i guess we're probably notgoing to vote on if we pass the delay. but my concern was i would loveto hold harmless our non-vested
employees, but we do not yetknow how we would pay for that, because it's roughly $4 million,and when we get to april, i will have a better understanding ofhow am i balancing that important value against theother important values that we have, what we know what therevenue is, what are we trading for what? so that's the value of waitinguntil april to have this conversation. derenak kaufaxthank you, ms.
evans. i will be supporting thismotion. i appreciate mr. moon'schronology as to the many hours of work that have already gottenus to where we are today, but as of recently, it became clear tome the e-mails and conversations, that even withthese many, many work sessions we've had in public workmeetings, there was still concern amongst our employeesabout what we were doing so this
buys us some time. i think as we move to the nextstage, as we propose the budget, i think the choices on the tablefor our board are, you know, what my colleagues have arealready stated. we either go in there andrealize that in april, somehow, if we're -- we can eitherprocess it as it stands right now, we can make modificationsto that or we can ask for an additional ask for the budget. that's also an amendment thatcould come up to give us
flexibility. we could ask for an additionalif the amendment goes through. so that's the other option onthe table, as we move forward to the next -- what we talked aboutthe budget. for this portion of this, i justwanted to address that since we were kind of talking about it,and -- but again, i'll be supporting this. moon. as i indicated earlier, i amgoing to be supporting motion to
postpone. initially, we talked about april6. april 27th is probably a betterdate with having a work session, you know, prior to the regularmeeting of april 27. and i am -- i will now refreshthe recollection of my colleagues going back to januarywork session when we were developing this main motion. at the time, you all rememberthat we also discussed some other options besides what's onthe main motion and eventually,
the consensus was what i read asthe main motion would be a main motion and at that time,precisely because any motion is subject to amendments, and thereis no guarantee that the main motion will pass, got to wait onthe votes, and even though we directed -- we gave ourguidance, our directive back in december, december to includethe $4.7 million of a budget reductions from erfc, erfc plan,if the action by this board deviates from that throughamendments, or by not passing the main motion, we would haveare to reconcile the differences
and the discrepancy when weadopt the final budget in may. that was what we talked about. i know it was a very longmeeting and a couple of board members who were not there onthat day due to different reasons, i want to just refreshthe memory of my colleagues that that's exactly how we got tothis point, how we are preparing ourselves for possible deviationfrom the main motion and how to reconcile that deviation. and i strongly urge mycolleagues to stick to that
agreement, that by passing thismotion to postpone, the main motion until april 27th, let'sjust keep the 4.7 contained in the proposed budget as is andafter we make our final decision on april 27, if there's adiscrepancy, reconcile the differences in may. that is my strong suggestion tomy colleagues as discussed at the january work session. so i potentially support thisdelay, but i want to ask staff to have certain informationready, because my concern is
we're going to get to a worksession. a few days before the worksession, it's going to be posted and we're going to have too muchinformation to discuss and how do we get to a real decision byapril 27 that's more informed than right now? i think it is acceptable toask for any outstanding erfc work session items, compare erfcto erfc for both benefits, returns and contributions and ithink it would be fair to bring back the compensation chart toshow where our employees are
when you include the $40 millionwe put in to mid-year teachers last year as well as the 33million that's proposed this year for the teacher salaryscale. and with that i think it needsto be posted in time to discuss and for the community to see,that we have time to reach out to the organizations and theteachers and get input. with that, if we are -- can bein agreement to those next steps, i could support thismotion. are there any outstandingerfc budget questions?
michael, i'm sorryi don't believe there are outstanding erfc budgetquestions. i thought we had addressed theitems from the september work session in our subsequent erfcpresentations. if the board feels it wasn'taddressed, it would be helpful to get clarification. we can ensure we have them tothe board in time for the board to have plenty of time forreview and community discussion before the april work session.
i think there are a number ofus who could be helpful in pointing out the outstandingitems from that work session because i believe there are. i can support this, but i thinkwe are not accepting. it's as if we've movedfrom -- we've divorced from reality the fact that actionshave consequences, and if we're going to delay the consequencesthat you have to fix the budget motion that comes after. you can't have are it both ways.
you can't say we choose not toact on erfc or we choose to delay it, but we're not going todo the work to fix the budget decision that comes after. you can't have it both ways. i will be vehemently opposed topassing this unless we enact something that puts in order thebudget motion that's a result of -- we can make this choice,and it sounds like we're going to but you have to align therest of the board's work for the rest of the night and make thebudget motion reflect the
decision we're about to make andthis is the problem of making last-minute decisions. and usually there's a lecture interms of doing homework and i understand this is a complexdecision that needed to be made at the last second but the factthat we have to make that decision doesn't absolve us ofthe responsibility to fix the budget motion that comes after. so i will support this, but onlyif we fix the budget motion. michael, i think that i hada question asking about the cost
trends for erfc that i don'tthink i've received an answer on in projections for those of thefuture. i think the one thing that isobvious to all of us, how important it is to erfc to ourteacher community, and we've as a board, i believe, need tounderstand exactly how well this fund -- the funds are beinghandled, how efficiently they're being managed and what theprojections are in terms of erfc in the context of our futurebudgets. so you need do all of thosethings, and make sure that we
are considering the balancebetween changing the promised benefit with current expensesthat we can find ways to make the budget work. so i would appreciate if youwould get that answer it's posted as response tobudget question number 16 for this current fiscal year. so does that include the futureout years, the projections? yes, it did include theprojections in that response? so what are the projections?
give me one minute, and i'llpull up the question. that response states if thefunds perform as projected, it's anticipated that the cost is apercentage of the total operating budget will remainstable. however, if actiaryialexperience deceiveiates, then it could decrease. so there's no future date. you can't predict, is that whatthe answer is? i'm just trying to understandthis trend line, and this goes
back to the question i had inthe work sessions which is, you know, my starting point is do weneed to change a benefit that's beloved. the only reason i would think weneed to do it is if it's unsustainable and we can'tafford it so this information i believe is critical for thatanalysis. i would say that it can beprojected. the actuaries do a projectioneach year and each year based on the actual experience, right,our projection from the
actuaries is compared with thatactual experience and then updated. okay, i think if this is theanswer, this is the answer but it's not very helpful if theanswer is they could increase depending on expenses. they really need to drill downon those expenses and figure out what is the best guess as towhat will happen because i assume that the reason westarted having these discussions was that costs were rising at arate we believed needed to be
adjusted within the context ofour annual budget. we started this fiscaldiscussion in the previous year, that was based on experience aswell as updated mortality tables. so we started this conversationwith that in mind and also knowing we have compensationissues that needed to be addressed without raising theactual compensations, salaries, and benefits. well, i guess so you'resaying that -- are you saying
that, yes, if we don't makechanges then it is unaffordable? what i would say is the costshad increased for fy18 based on our previous investmentexperience as well as the updated mortality tableso tohelp address those increasing costs knowing we have a focus oncompensations, we started these studies looking at possible wayswe can make changes. it's always a balance, right, aswe're looking at expending money in terms of expending it inemployee benefits and salaries and the board ultimately makesthose decisions and the purpose
of these studies was to provideinformation to the board so they could make the best decisionlooking at the limited resources that we have available to us infy18. i'm in favor of postponing. this discussion alone isevidence that the clarity and understanding of what we'redoing and why we're doing it in the context of other plethora ofchoices that we could do to reduce change in costs and someof the proposals we'll make i think these are the choices,and they are, in fact,
demonstrated of this order, howwe handle the erfc so i'm very much in favor of postponing thismrs. wilson, thank you for askingthose questions, because i think one of the things that we havebeen talking about is how can we do things better, moreeffectively, more efficiently, while still protecting the coreof what we do, which is every decision that we make is how dowe ensure that every -- that the way we educate our childrenensures the greatest success, and that means we make theinvestment in our personnel.
and there are multiple ways ofmaking the investment in our personnel. what we don't do is we are notfund managers. and so some of the questionsthat are coming out are, are there more effective efficientways of managing the fund which could realize some savings whichcould then be applied to reinvesting into the fund? and the other aspect is what ms. mclaughlin mentioned, which is,are we treating all of our
employees equitiably? are we doing it whether they arein the fcerf system, which has a certain level of contribution orif they are in the combined erfc drf system, and so these arelots of questions that we've spent a lot of time in the pastyear talking about, but we continue to unpack it more andmore, and so there are more questions. there are more -- there's moreinformation that's necessary for people to make these informeddecisions.
i know that ms. hough has somequestions about active versus passive. both she and ms. so having the time to unpack itand make an informed decision is going to be really important. so we appreciate the staffsupport in helping us get those questions answered andcontinuing the dialogue at another work session.
to address mrs. schultz'sconcerns about the budget, what i would suggest is that we goahead and adopt or put forth to a vote the delay motion, andthen we talk about the budget as a separate, you know, how do wefund it? do we need to direct thesuperintendent to either increase the ask, or do we needto ask the superintendent to -- taking into account whatwe find from the future discussion on the erfc, applyany savings we find in that
discussion to it, any othersavings. there are multiple ways ofaddressing it, that i would not use the -- use that as adelay -- a reason for not postponing this decision. seeing no other hands or lights,i will make some brief comments. we did have quite a few worksessions on this. we received many discussions onthis in december and directed the superintendent to put thesavings into his budget, the $4.7 million into his budget.
so i actually think we should bemaking a decision tonight one way or the other. we've had this on our agenda fora while. we've had this discussion for ibelieve the last six months. i'm not sure we actually want toreopen this entire conversation. but it's clear that the boardwants to do that and wants a lot more information and to considerother ideas. so with that, the board wants todo this, so i won't object, even though i actually think it's nota good idea.
so with that, i will read themotion. i move to postpone themotion -- i move to postpone the motion until the april 27thregular meeting. that's unanimous. the motion passes. [applause]madam chair, i have a motion. actually, i have --madam chair, i believe that there was a subsequent motion toms. palchik's own amendment.
now that it becomes anamendment, we need to vote on that amendmentit was -- mr. foster, wasthat a substitute motion that we just voted on? it was a substitute motion,yes. in that case, we need to voteon the original motion. all those in favor, raise yourhand. we're voting on the motion -- assubstituted, we're basically just voting on the same thing asecond time.
all those in favor. so i will call on mrs. hough fora motion. hough had a motion that shewould like to offer. yeah, madam chair, because wehave voted to delay, i'm asking for the chair to make a motionto amend the budget, because we did not consider that as a partof the previous motion. would you mind if i made myerfc motion first? we're not on the budget yet,so we need to get some -- i've
asked the clerk and mr. fosterand mrs. quinn to give us someadvice on what -- if you could read your e-mail, i've asked youfor that information. so we will get to that when weget to the budget and now i'm calling on mrs. hough for amotion. thank you, chairwoman. so i'll read my motion now.
the fcps school board directsthe erfc board of trustees to provide an analysis of somemanagement alternative, for example, the mix of passive andactive management that may produce savings for the fundwithout harming the interests of the trustee will bring theanalysis to the school board on or before march 31, 2017. hough, would you like tospeak to your motion? this is something that inreading about the fund and reviewing returns and results, ithink that it would be prudent
and good governance by thisboard to be presented specific information which will come inthe form of a second motion. but as some background lookingat the 1, 5, and 10-year returns, erfc is on the 1 and5-year returns in the lowest quartile of returns compared toother public pension funds, and in the 10-year return ranked inthe bottom half. given that, i think it isprudent for us to ask some questions and to look at somealternatives at possibly lowering our fees and helpingsave money for our employees and
yeah, thank you. hough forbringing this up and being willing to work with me on thelanguage. i think as we try to do right byour new mid-career and retired teachers, balancing salaries andbenefits, you know, because we do have to do that. we've done a lot of work onsalaries and starting the work on benefits to make sure we'recompetitive and balancing everything in tight times.
i am increasingly convinced fromsome of the conversations that i've heard that we should lookfor savings in the management of the fund, and these would besavings that don't change the reality or the experience foremployees and retirees, you know, if there's room forsavings that doesn't come out of people's pockets, that's wherewe should be looking for them. i think we owe it to ouremployees to explore this. is there discussion of thismotion? mcelveen?
this question would be formembers of staff who sit on the erfc board of trustees. this is an extensive amount ofinformation that requires what looks to be extensive analysis. what is your ability to completethis in the time frame suggested? we did run through the dateswith the erfc staff because it would be the erfc staff workingwith the staff to work with the consultants.
i believe if we can deliver thereport by march 31, we were thinking we would have somediscussion at the april work session regarding two items thatare currently put forth for follow-on motion. so i guess the short answer is,yes, we think it's doable as long as we can deliver thereport by march 31 and have a work session in the april 24,all-day work session. thank youms. briefly, i want to thank ms.
hynes for bringingthis forward. i am part of the reason why ms. corbett sanders and i are thereason we would postpone any changes any effects to theretirees. i think it would be importantand prudent for us to see if there's any ways to find thesesavings in very tight times, short term and definitely longterm before we start to make those cuts on the backs ofour -- so i will be supporting this motion.
i also have a legal questionfor the clerk and for mr. foster. the way this reads now it's afollow-on motion, and i believe the intention is to be aseparate motion, isn't that the case? it needs to give -- i don'tbelieve this can be a follow-on motion, isn't that correct? because we've voted to delay themotion, the previous motion, so this isn't a simple motionright.
i think your point is correct,but there's nothing that would stop because you just got intothis follow-on motion for being raised as the main motion, underroberts rules, someone, a member of the body at any time couldsay i hereby move as follows, and it's voted on or it's not. so shouldn't it read, i movethat the school board direct the erfc board. madam clerk, could you pleasechange that. is that acceptable to you, ms.
hough? is there any objection to makingthat change? it might as well -- i'm seeingno objection to making that change, and we'll need to dothat on the next motion as well. these are simply their ownmotions as opposed to follow-on motions. hough, ms. hynes, i thank youfor bringing this to the board. it's really important motion,and there's another aspect i
think the public should know,which is that this was initially raised in the context of thecitizen members participating in the budget task force. without harm to the interest of employeesand retirees. it is expected the board of trustees willbring that analysis to the school board on also, those in favor of this motion, raiseyour hand. that's unanimous and that motion passes. hough for a second motion.
i move the fcps directs erfc board of trusteesbring to the school board investment choices -- i'm sorry analysis and justification -- reportresults, compare active selections against the related index used for comparison andinclude no less than year-to-date trailing 12 months previous five years and, 10 yearperiod. hough, would you like to speak to your motion? yes, i appreciate ms. corbett sanders bringing up the work of taskforce of the citizens. i was remiss in that. i think it's a great example of how rich ourcounty is in resources that exist within our
own community members. and then i also want to thank ms. hynes for working with me on this on detailingout what kind of information we feel would be helpful to us and in talking to ms. quinn and ms. michael, i understand that much of this informationis already written out and reported to us on an annual basis. this is more inclusive and ms. quinn has agreed it would be easy to put inand present to us.
i think given the public conversation we'rehaving, it would be good to come to us specifically in the context of the conversation on erfcto review, discuss and ask questions. yes, thank you. everything ms. hough just said. i won't repeat it. i'm grateful to people in the community whohave been knocking on our door and telling us we really should have better informationfor the oversight role that we have. i actually have a question about this, nowthat i'm looking at it.
the last sentence says the report and a discussionof potential future reporting. do you have any recommendations. i'm okay with taking out "and discussion." it sounds like it's a planned discussion on-- the delay of position we discussed an that work session would correlate at the same time. yes, that was our current thinking when wewould bring the discussion to the board. and we feel like that's going to be enoughtime to then have a motion for april 27? we should be able to meet that timeline. did you just amend your motion, mrs.
the last sentence. -- so you amended your motion and ms. hynes is in agreement with that. thank you, i will support this and for thosewho are listening do get a yearly investment report on the performance of the portfolio. so this is in this motion it does describein detail the scope of the information that we would like which is appropriate. i wanted to let people know we do get fairlydetailed investment report each year. it is important, obviously, that we make surethat we are efficient as possible with this
pension plan and if there are opportunitiesfor us to make adjustments to save money in terms of either better performance of theinvestment portfolio or saving on the management plan, obviously it is incumbent on us andthe board of trustees that is it their job as well and part of their responsibility. they are active overseers of the plan so ido support this. i look forward to getting a report. i just want to say, i want to thank ms. hough for this motion. i do support it.
i do believe there is fiduciary responsibilitieson the part of erfc board and i think in concert with the members, the public members of thetask force, many of whom were appointed by the board, this shows the board is seekingaccountability in those fiduciary responsibilities and i just want to say that if somebody hadbeen watching the agenda of the board, there were amendments that were mine, i don't wantto confuse the public, that come later that sound very similar to this. and just to -- because of, again the delaysi move those budget follow-on motions. we're going to see a little more erfc discussionlater. bull they're all akin to the same purposeas this, which is seeking the accountability
in looking at the cost of erfc and tryingto do what we can tort manage -- for the management side of that. i think this is very reflective motion andand i definitely will support it. m_c_laughlin? i appreciate the support that my colleagueshave expressed for this motion. i guess the one thing that come to mind forme is how come this isn't something we're already expecting? i mean, i read this language and i would thinkthis should be standard operating procedure. so is there something else that's been donein the past instead of this?
because i have to be honest, if i were inthe public right now looking at this motion, i would be thinking, so what is the boarddoing in terms of studying this type of analysis to ensure that the erfc is functioning inits optimal level? we do do anual reporting to the board everyyear. we did that this july. so we give these 3, 5, 7, 10-year returnsalong with the funded ratio of the plan, a considerable amount of information statisticson the plan membership, board strategic initiative. i've done that for the last seven years. i know the executive director did that priorto me.
we report on all the governor's policies andprocedures. we have these reports available on board docsinvestment consultant produces. those are posted so we're very transparenton all the work that has been done by the board of trustees. just to maybe make my question a little moreclear, when you read this motion and it's got a, b, c and d in its expectations, i guessthe way it reads, it's saying as if we haven't done that. and you're telling me of these four requests,this is some or parts of this does get done, just maybe not all of them?
we certainly have justifications for all theasset allocation we have done to the asset classes we have added. those are part of the public record of theboard of trustees minutes. we do reporting annually on our returns. we have the trailing 3, 5, 10-year returns. we can produce those and show those to youagain. if you have this reporting in april, we willdo the calendar year 2016 and report that to you. so we give comparisons against our benchmarksand against your peer groups which are those
pension plans greater than $1 billion. based orn your response, i'm trying to piecethis together with clarity. a, b, and c are asking you to do somethingyou don't typically do. this would require us to go back historicallyand say why are we in this asset class, we think interest rates have nowhere to go butup, we became more defensive and wanted to protect the assets of the fund -- i thinkthat's what you're asking by part a. why did we get into each of the asset classesthat we're in? and report results of net fees. do you not typically do that?
we don't do that against our peer group, becauseour peer group doesn't report fees. we do have a net up fee section. that's posted on board docs. it's a public document. we can add that to the school board reportingbut we won't be able to do it as a peer comparison because our peers don't report that way. i guess, madam chair, i would like to justask ms. hough since she's the maker of this motion,a question. certainly.
so, ms. hough, when you drafted this motion, did youconsult with staff to understand what currently gets done and therefore what you felt ms. hynes to co-sponsor this with you, what additionalinformation is simply not being provided as of now so this is what you're framing out? we did discuss that, that this is some ofthis is already reported. as i stated, when i made the motion, i realizethat much of this is already reported. i think in context of the conversation we'regoing to have about the management and the different alternatives and now in additionwhat we didn't vote on earlier tonight, i
think that this is good to have handy andto be there. i realize we could look it up in board docsand much of this is there but for us to have a conversation in context, i think is prudentfor us to be looking at all all at the same time for the information. thank you for that clarity. that right there is exactly why i would supportthis motion. in the six years i've been on this board,one of the things this school system is still trying to continue usually improve on andas a board member we are drastically not there, which is having a synthesis of informationin one spot.
with everything that the board has to determinewhen it's in different places, then it's really difficult for the board as well as the publicwho is following the work we do to understand what information is informing. so this alone if you're telling me we're goingto bring it altogether and have in place so we can have thoughtful discussion with it,synthesized, then, again, you have my full support then. i would like to make one clarifying. we took out "and discussion" for the motion. but for both motions i want to make clearthat as part of the reporting expected no
later than, i would like it posted for boththe board and the public to review this prior on or before march 31. seeing no other lights on, i will read themotion before us. i move that the fcps direct the erfc boardof trustees to bring to the school board analysis and justification for investment choices. the report results net of c, c, compare anyactive management selection against related index use for comparison and, d, include noless than year-to-date trailing 12 months, previous 3 years, previous 5 years and previous10-year period. the report on potential future reporting isexpected no later than march 31, 2017.
all those in favor, raise your hand. so that concludes our section on the erfcfor tonight. i am going to call for a 5-minute recess whilei consult with our attorneys about how what we've just done effects what we're about todo. don't go very far, board members. we'll be back.