A proposed Spotsylvania County School Board policy requiring board members to arrange school visits with the superintendent drew the ire of representatives Larry DiBella of the Berkeley District and Rich Lieberman of the Lee Hill District during a meeting Monday night.
DiBella and Lieberman accused Superintendent Clint Mitchell of altering the policy, which previously required board members to arrange visits with principals, after a review on April 20. DiBella and Lieberman questioned if Dennis Martin, the school division’s executive director of organizational compliance, was aware of the changes before they were presented to the board on Monday and ultimately passed by a 5-2 vote on first reading.
Mitchell said Martin was aware of the changes, because the division uses specific personnel as “policy leaders,” who submit all changes to Martin, so that he can forward them to the school board. Mitchell said he is never the leader on any policy, but provides feedback on them all.
He noted that the change to the policy in question was simply a recommendation.
“All school board members received these additional policies with specific recommendations in red. We put them in red,” Mitchell said. “As this is the first reading, school board members will have one month to make recommendations for edits, if desired, before the second reading. So, the information I put in is for consideration. It’s the first reading, and really that’s it.”
DiBella’s motion — to table the vote until next month’s regular meeting — was supported by Lieberman and fellow first-year board member Jennifer Craig Ford of the Battlefield District but failed 4-3. After the vote to defer the matter failed, Craig Ford voted in favor of the policy.
“This is absolutely not OK,” DiBella said of the changes to Policy BHA-R, also known as the “board orientation” policy.
The school board approved a total of 123 policies on Monday, including the one in question. DiBella said before voting for approval, the board should’ve taken the time to thoroughly consider each one in case other changes were implemented since the April review.
The updates are part of the division’s 2026 Five-Year Cyclical Policy Review. In addition to now requiring the superintendent’s office to approve board member visits to schools, the board orientation policy also states that board members must inform the superintendent before accepting invitations from school personnel to attend events during the school day. They do not have to coordinate attending after-school events and activities or any event they attend as the parent of a student.
DiBella wanted to read the policy “word for word” so that the public is aware of what the board approved. Lieberman requested a breakdown of the changes made since the first review but was denied by the board.
Lieberman said he emailed Martin twice about the policy. He said he’s concerned that the changes limit the board’s authority. He’s perplexed that the changes were listed under “board orientation,” but which, in his opinion, have nothing to do with orientation. With 283 pages of policy to review, the board should’ve delayed the vote until next month, he said.
“I’m not so sure this wasn’t done intentionally to slip it past us,” Lieberman said.
While Mitchell didn’t address the concern during the meeting, board members bristled at the notion that he would attempt to deceive them.
Courtland District representative Carol Medawar said she doesn’t believe Mitchell or his staff pulled a bait and switch, and “some things just slip through the cracks.”
Vice Chair Belen Rodas of the Chancellor District said the board’s job is to read policies, and members had ample time to do so.
“I’ll just say if you’re trying to slip something past people, giving them all of the documents redlined and edited and highlighting changes days in advance so you have access to it is a really inefficient way to slip something past somebody,” Rodas said. “I don’t have any concerns about that.”
This wasn’t DiBella’s first public squabble with Mitchell. At the April 29 work session, DiBella accused the superintendent of attempting to undermine the Career and Technical Education program in the county by voicing support for only two new positions after a third one was approved by the board.
“I don’t know how we got to the situation where we invite the superintendent to be giving us counter offers to a vote we already made in the majority,” DiBella said during that meeting … “We continue to allow the superintendent to get invited to a debate on this board, and that’s not the place.”
Mitchell said those comments and others from DiBella are concerning since “I’m always mindful of my relationship with all board members.”
In another decision on Monday, the board voted 6-1 to adopt a new policy on public comments on first reading.
Medawar voted against the policy, saying it needs to be tweaked. She was concerned about the section that requires public speakers to either be residents or taxpayers of Spotsylvania County, including parents or guardians of students, current students, employees or retirees of the school division, business owners, or property owners.
Medawar said sometimes outside entities — such as representatives of higher education — have insight to add during public comment. The new policy states that speakers may be required to show identification to the board clerk before they’re permitted to comment.
The policy comes after Stafford County resident Shamgar Connors was accused of racist rhetoric and public displays during meetings last year. This past November, he was banned from Spotsylvania School Board meetings for the remainder of the school year. Under the new policy, Connors would not be permitted to speak since he doesn’t meet any of the criteria.
“I think we’re well aware of the problem we’re trying to solve, and we want decorum and we want citizens to be able to come and speak,” Medawar said … “[But] sometimes we can’t always focus on what people who abuse things do and we have to think about what the best people do and the best intentions of people.”
