Prince William County School Board members voted 4–3 on Dec. 3 to direct the superintendent to amend regulation 5‑61‑2 so that teachers’ classroom assignment, planning and lunch periods "shall not exceed 7 and 1/2 continuous hours" beginning with the 2026–27 school year.

The board’s decision came after more than an hour of public comment in which dozens of teachers, union representatives, parents and students urged the board to pause the change and negotiate pay and implementation details. "Pay us well, respect our time, and let us manage the work that keeps this district running," said Tim Fahey, an educator and parent, during the citizen comment period.

Vice Chair Tracy Blake, who introduced the motion, framed the change as an operational alignment to match schedules across staff categories and to provide built‑in time for planning, collaboration and safer student transitions. "We need a system that supports teachers instead of depending on them to patch holes with their personal time," Blake said during debate.

Board members who opposed the motion emphasized process and compensation concerns. Mr. Wilk, a board member who has previously led efforts on this issue, warned about morale and pay calculations, saying, "An extra 30 minutes daily is an extra 2.5 hours each week, adding up to 97.5 hours per year," and argued the board lacked sufficient justification and stakeholder engagement for this timing.

Several speakers during public comment said the division proposed the change with insufficient notice to educators and without an operational plan showing how the 30 minutes would be used. "This proposed vote without discussion of increased compensation will have consequences," Emily Cherry, a PWA co‑chair, told the board, citing contract and bargaining procedures.

Board supporters pointed to regional norms and recent pay increases. Ms. Wall noted that most nearby divisions use a 7.5‑hour day and that the division has increased teacher salaries substantially in recent years; she said the change would allow consistent planning time and better coverage during arrival and dismissal.

The motion directs the superintendent to amend the regulation; it does not set the operational details of how the extra time will be scheduled, which board members said will be handled by administration and discussed further with schools and bargaining representatives. Several board members urged that the administration present sample schedules and a plan for leave accrual, hourly‑rate calculations, and other implementation issues.

The vote followed a failed motion to table the decision until April. With the amendment now approved, board members who supported the change said they expect the budget process and future bargaining rounds to address pay and other impacts. Opponents said they will press for more protections and clarity through any next steps.

What happens next: the superintendent will be directed to prepare the amendment to Regulation 5‑61‑2 and administrative teams will develop implementation guidance. The board said it expects additional operational conversations and possible bargaining discussions to follow.