PGCPS policy committee approves 2025–26 work plan, forwards multiple policy revisions and rescissions to sponsor

The Policy and Governance Committee of the Prince George's County Board of Education voted unanimously on Aug. 19 to recommend the 2025–26 committee work plan to the full board and advanced multiple policy changes for further drafting, legal review and public consideration.

In a roll-call vote the committee recorded five affirmative votes (Dr. Felton Moss, Board Member Olivo, Vice Chair Briggs, Board Member Brown and Board Member Walker) to recommend the work plan for full-board consideration.

Committee action and votes

- Work plan: The committee recommended the annual work plan to the full board (vote 5–0). The work plan schedules policy reviews and noted two items that will be prioritized immediately: the superintendent evaluation documents and an immigration-related "sensitive locations" policy required by state law.

- Policy 8.100 (Board standing committees and focus work groups): The committee voted 5–0 to send the revised draft of policy 8.100 back to the policy sponsor (administrative staff) for revision and legal review. The draft consolidates advisory‑committee language, adds references to a superintendent-evaluation committee and a board self-evaluation mechanism, and proposes that Board Policy 91‑40 (Citizens Advisory Committees) be rescinded as redundant if the consolidated policy is adopted.

- Rescissions: The committee recommended rescinding several policies it deemed obsolete or redundant, including policies governing newspaper advertising and numbering/indexing of board actions, and (if 8.100 is adopted) board policy 91‑40 on citizens' advisory committees. The motion to recommend rescissions passed 5–0.

- Policies for enactment: After receiving no public comments during the public review period, the committee recommended two policies for enactment by the full board (listed in the meeting as items 9.1 and 9.2). The committee recorded five affirmative votes for those recommendations.

Committee discussion

Members debated whether the superintendent evaluation group should remain a standing committee (which would carry recurring meeting expectations) or become a time‑bound ad hoc committee. Board Member Walker and others supported making the superintendent-evaluation work time‑bound and task‑oriented. Chair Felton Moss asked staff to seek legal review and to consult the superintendent and the full board as the draft is finalized.

Members also discussed expanding stakeholder participation in committee work. Chair Moss raised an idea — to explore offering a nonvoting slot on standing committees to a PCAC (Parent Community Advisory Committee) representative or another community designee — and several board members said the idea merits further discussion at committee or retreat-level work in order to define scope and guardrails.

Next steps

Staff will: (1) incorporate committee feedback into the 8.100 draft; (2) send the draft for Office of General Counsel review; (3) solicit superintendent feedback on evaluation timelines and instruments; and (4) return the revised draft to the committee before it goes to the full board and, if appropriate, for public comment. The committee also asked staff to circulate the link used by members to propose policy amendments so members can submit edits in advance of meetings.

—