Internal FCPS Document Finally Confirms Unlawful Self-Dealing by School Board
In May 2025, the Fairfax County Times reported that the School Board, at a closed meeting in February, had secretly authorized its members to hire personal “staff directors” at salaries exceeding $120,000 per year. Fairfax Schools Monitor was concerned because Virginia law requires all discussions of subjects like this to be made open meetings, not behind closed doors. Another concern was that the reported salaries, for positions that wouldn’t even require a college degree, would exceed the salaries of almost all FCPS teachers. The timing suggested that the Board may have been trying to avoid scrutiny of self-serving spending while budgetary constraints were forcing FCPS to pare back raises for teachers and other employees.
For these reasons, we decided to seek more information about what had occurred. Our inquiries were met with silence, stonewalling and denials.
We began by sending emails to four of the Board members (then-Braddock representative Sizemore-Heizer and at-large members McDaniel, McElveen and Moon), asking whether they had authorized the new positions and, if so, whether this had been done in an open session of the Board. None of the four would answer these simple questions, even after follow-up inquiries.
We then submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for relevant documents. This was stonewalled by the FCPS Division Counsel, John Foster, who claimed the Board considered no documents, other than ones exempted by law from disclosure, in connection with the staff director positions.
We then filed suit in Circuit Court. At trial, Mr. Foster admitted there had been a closed meeting in February, but he claimed the meeting did not involve any discussion or decision by the Board members about hiring new staff aides. He claimed that any decisions regarding the need for additional personnel would have been made by the human resources department and/or by the FCPS Superintendent, not by the Board.
Mr. Foster’s denials didn’t ring true. Public records show that whereas each Board member had one personal “staff aide” in 2024, they were hiring additional “staff directors” at the $120,000+ salaries in the spring of 2025, shortly after the closed meeting in February. The total payroll of staffers reporting directly to the Board members almost doubled as a result, increasing from $1,198,340 at the end of 2024 to $2,226,831 for the 2025-26 school year. Wouldn’t the Board necessarily have been involved in deliberations about this, since the added employees would be reporting directly to them? Nevertheless, given Mr. Foster’s sworn testimony, the court ruled we hadn’t proven that FCPS failed to produce documents required to be disclosed under FOIA.
Fairfax Schools Monitor reported on these efforts in two prior articles, here and here. It seemed we had exhausted what could be done to uncover what had really happened.
But just recently, out of the blue, FCPS has finally acknowledged that the School Board did engage in closed-door self-dealing regarding its staffing.
The agenda materials for the recent February 26, 2026 meeting of the School Board contain a summary of how the Board has utilized its “flexibility reserve fund” in recent years. It discloses that the fund was used last year to pay for the expensive aides to the Board members. According to the FCPS document, the Board approved this action at a closed meeting in February 2025. Finally!
The approval at a non-public meeting was a blatant violation of Virginia’s open meetings statute. Perhaps this revelation was inadvertent. Members of big bureaucracies don’t always know what has been previously denied by other members of the organization. But the truth can’t now be put back in the bottle.
The Board members should admit their wrongdoing and apologize. Budget issues should be decided with candor and tough decisions in public, not deception and self-dealing in secret, unlawful meetings. Citizens, teachers and other employees of FCPS deserve leaders who hold themselves to a higher standard than how they acted in this case.
In addition, Mr. Foster should be fired. He violated his duty to ensure that Board decisions are made in public; he abused his FOIA obligations; and he misled the public and the court with his sworn testimony.
I spoke about these issues at last evening’s meeting of the School Board. [The video of the meeting is here; my statement begins at the 32:06 time-stamp.]
If you believe that this article was informative and useful, please share it with others and encourage them to register to receive notices of future postings on this site.
Given the unlawful practice, is there grounds for a lawsuit?
Logan: The Virginia Freedom of Information Act does authorize some suits for violating its provisions. See Va. Code section 2.2-3714. But I don’t think a suit would accomplish much here. I don’t see a provision that would allow the court to invalidate the actions the Board took in the closed session. The Board could be fined $1,000, but I doubt it’d be in anyone’s interest to sue to get such a small penalty.
I’d like to know where the money in the “flexibility reserve fund” came from? Was it federal COVID money?
CK: The “flexibility reserve fund” is part of the overall FCPS budget, so I would guess that the funds in it don’t come from a specific source such as COVID relief money. But I don’t know for sure.
Fairfax County ordinances and procedures enable the discipline and removal of officials for misconduct, ensuring accountability in local governance. The County also has an ethics code that governs the behavior of officials, providing guidelines on ethical conduct. Elected officials can face disciplinary measures if they engage in misconduct, which may include censure, suspension, or other actions as defined by local laws. I had to look up this information. Who, or what body, would be in charge of imposing disciplinary measures? A Recall would be cumbersome and unrealistic, since the Democrats control the playing field, but I would be interested in knowing if any other actions can be taken against them. They play fast and loose with the power they have been given.
Valerie: Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately, I think publicity, and the ballot box, are the only ways to effectively deal with school board members who act as they have done here. The ballot box hasn’t been effective recently, because most voters seem to vote for down-ballot candidates based on their party affiliation, rather than scrutinizing the merits and demerits of each candidate. Those who are concerned, like you and I, should continue to bring the light of public scrutiny on what is occurring.
Mark – With roughly 50% of the county expenditure or about $2.5-$2.7 billion per year going to the schools the taxpayers ought to be seriously asking what they are getting for roughly half their property tax payments which increase every year at a rate greater than overall inflation. Sure, there are metrics like school performance against benchmarks, but what is clearly lacking is an objective measure of senior school system leadership and management performance. Every year I ask myself “What school system senior management oversight am I getting in return for the $X thousands I involuntarily pay into school system”……the realistic answer is apparently not all that much. I suspect part of the problem is attracting business minded, hard nosed and performance objective focused folks to run for those time consuming board positions, so instead we end up with ideologically motivated folks that would never qualify to be on the board of a similar sized commercial multi-billion dollar revenue enterprise.. Maybe part of the solution to voter apathy and lack of citizen involvement could somehow be tied to discontent with the level of county property taxes and the disconnect between the amount paid in and the quality of the output.
Bill: Thanks much for taking the time to share your thoughtful comments.
These people are supposed to be guiding our children and grandchildren. They are supposed to be the pillars of society. Yet it appears they have committed a crime. Intentional malfeasance at best in what is supposed to be one of the most elite school districts in the country. I find it laughable.
I am a Virginia attorney and represent a client pursuing a lawsuit against the Fairfax County School Board based, in part, on allegations the school system also violated the Virginia open records laws by conducting school business in closed session but failed to publicly report a vote thereafter. I’d be happy to talk to anyone who has an interest in learning more or who might have information to provide about their own experience with the School Board’s apparent violations of the open records laws. Mark, feel free to share my email with anyone who expresses an interest.
Jon: Thanks. Your comment is now posted as a Comment on my latest post, so some may see it there. If I learn that others have a potential claim concerning, or information about, the School Board’s unlawful meetings behind closed doors, I will refer them to you.
Mark