Updates on the Fight for Quality Public Education in Brevard County, FL
0:00 Thank you for joining us.
0:30 Thank you.
7:59 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America
8:05 and to the Republic of
8:06 which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with
8:11 liberty and justice for all.
8:13 Next policy is board policy 5136 wireless communication devices.
8:20 Are there any discussion items on this board agenda item?
8:25 You skipped the superintendent?
8:26 You skipped the superintendent search.
8:26 Oh, I don’t see him.
8:26 I didn’t see him.
8:26 The superintendent?
8:26 The search.
8:27 Oh, the search.
8:32 I’m sorry.
8:33 I thought it said superintendent search.
8:35 And we met the whole time and talked about it.
8:37 First topic.
8:38 I’m sorry.
8:38 First topic is superintendent search discussion and direction.
8:41 Florida school board associations will lead the conversation.
8:44 Come on up, Mr. Vogel.
8:46 Thank you very much.
8:47 John and I are glad to be here today and everything is moving on
8:58 as scheduled.
9:01 The first item I’d like to refer to you on is a sheet that we
9:07 provide in your packet.
9:09 It’s a superintendent search screening guide.
9:12 And this is an optional guide that board members might use as
9:18 they are looking at candidates as they come in.
9:21 And it’s just pretty much generic and it covers some of the
9:25 areas that are priorities of this board.
9:27 The one only thing I’d like to remind the board of is any
9:32 official notes could be public records.
9:36 So if you decide to use this guide, then it could be requested
9:41 as a public document.
9:42 But many board members use this to keep track of the candidates
9:46 as they come in.
9:47 And we’re very pleased to have four right now.
9:50 And I know more are going to be applying soon.
9:53 So that is the first item I wanted to cover.
9:56 The second item is on April 4th, the board will be having a
10:02 discussion and determining the semifinalists.
10:06 And I’d like to kind of give you an overview of that process on
10:11 what we would use.
10:12 The first thing that we’d like to do is the board will have some
10:17 time to look at all of them.
10:19 And we’ll provide an overhead with a list of all of the
10:24 candidates.
10:25 And we’ll start out with a discussion of the candidates.
10:29 And then we will go through candidate by candidate and ask board
10:36 members which of the candidates they would like to continue in
10:40 the process.
10:41 And we call it continuing the process.
10:42 And we call it continuing the process at this particular time.
10:47 If three board members would like to have a person continue in
10:52 the process, then we would move those people forward.
10:56 For example, if there might be two board members that would like
11:01 a candidate to move continuing the process, then we would have
11:06 further discussion on those two to see if a board member that
11:11 would wanted to advocate for that person and another board
11:16 member would like to bring the person in continuing the process,
11:20 then we’ll add that person also.
11:22 And we’ll keep going through that process until we determine who
11:27 we would want to continue in the process.
11:29 And at that point, we would have our semifinalist list.
11:34 We don’t do any ranking at all.
11:36 We just have a conversation and go through that process.
11:40 And it works really well because many board members, some board
11:45 members might see something with a candidate the other board
11:49 members might not pick up.
11:50 At that point when we declare our semifinalist, we start the
11:56 background checking process with our law firm, Green Spoon Martyr,
12:02 that we work with out of Orlando.
12:04 And then we also, and board members could be thinking about this
12:08 right now.
12:08 Then if there’s an important question that board members would
12:15 like to ask, you could tell us what those questions are.
12:19 And you don’t have to, what we’ll do is we’ll ask you to just
12:23 email them to us or we’ll call you and get those questions.
12:26 And then we’ll ask the semifinalist to respond to three of them
12:34 in video format, less than five minutes.
12:40 And then we’ll ask the other two in written format.
12:44 And so then what, and all of these responses from the semifinalists
12:52 then are available on the portal, website portal.
12:56 So everyone in the community can get to know the candidates,
13:00 board members get a chance to see the candidates in a video
13:05 format.
13:05 And then important questions that board members might have, they
13:10 can get some initial answers from that.
13:13 And then, so when the time comes to select the finalists, the
13:18 board members have the background check information.
13:21 They’ve, they’ve had reference checking and they’ve been able to
13:25 at least have some identification with those candidates.
13:28 So any questions?
13:30 Yeah, I have one.
13:31 So you want each board member to identify one specific question
13:34 that we want answered, correct?
13:35 Correct.
13:36 Okay.
13:37 And we don’t need that right now, but we would, there’ll be a
13:40 lot more to do it.
13:40 But we’d like to have then, there’d be five questions that would
13:44 be sent out to each, the same questions.
13:46 Okay.
13:47 For every one of the people it’s identified as a semifinalist.
13:49 Perfect.
13:50 Thank you.
13:51 So you can kind of think about the question now.
13:52 Okay.
13:53 So you don’t get the last thing.
13:54 And Mr.
13:55 And if you can, just for the posterity of like a duplicate,
14:00 duplicative efforts.
14:02 If she says the same thing as me and my question, right, then we’re
14:05 going to have to change it around.
14:06 What happens is we’ll get those questions and then we’ll work
14:11 individually with the board member.
14:12 Got it.
14:13 So we won’t have the same questions.
14:15 So you’ll call and say, hey, that’s already being covered.
14:16 Right.
14:17 We’ll do that.
14:18 And then, all right, go ahead.
14:19 I’m sorry.
14:20 That’s a very good question.
14:21 But we’ll work individually with the board members to determine
14:25 that question.
14:25 But I always like to have board members think about it, you know,
14:29 well in advance.
14:30 So you can think of what you’d like to go ahead and ask.
14:33 Thank you.
14:35 Okay.
14:36 So that’s kind of the semifinalist process.
14:39 And then at that point, we’re moving forward.
14:42 And I’m going to turn things over to John now to talk a little
14:45 bit about what happens,
14:47 what we’re recommending when we get to the finalist process and
14:52 interviews.
14:53 Thank you.
14:54 Thank you, Dr. Vogel, and good afternoon, board members.
15:01 In your packet, you should have three sample interview schedules
15:06 for the on-site interviews.
15:08 Once you select your finalist, which you would do on, excuse me,
15:14 April the 18th, there’s a sample.
15:18 And should the board select three finalists, there’s a one-page
15:22 sample interview schedule there.
15:24 If you select four finalists, there’s a sample of that.
15:27 And if you select five finalists, there’s a sample for that as
15:31 well.
15:31 I will start off by saying that this is certainly just the
15:35 initial stages of FSBA trying to get input from the board
15:39 about your thoughts on how the one or two-day on-site interview
15:45 process would occur.
15:48 If you looked at the little sample that if you have three finalists,
15:52 we would be able to do that in one day,
15:54 where you can complete your interview of the three finalists as
15:59 a sitting body.
15:59 And the afternoon, you could do your one-on-one interviews for
16:04 an hour with each finalist that afternoon.
16:07 So if we have three finalists, should the board select three, we
16:11 could complete that in one day.
16:13 If you have three finalists with four or five finalists, we
16:18 would need the two days which you’ve set aside for onsite
16:21 interviews to be April the 27th and 28th.
16:25 We would need two days for four or five finalists.
16:30 If I could ask you to please turn with me to the sample with
16:34 four finalists.
16:35 And I just want to kind of review some high points of some
16:40 options the board may have if you have three, four, or five
16:44 finalists.
16:44 So on the first date, over to the left column for the sample
16:49 with four finalists on two days, that’s the date of arrival for
16:54 any out-of-district or out-of-area finalists.
16:57 If you’ll look at the bottom of that far-left column, dinner
17:02 with a host, that is an option should you decide to do that.
17:06 If you want to identify a district host or maybe two district
17:11 hosts, two district staff members for each finalist to kind of
17:15 be their onsite host for these two days,
17:18 the option is you could have the host have dinner with the finalists.
17:23 We found out over the years with travel and things of that
17:27 nature that dinner is an option.
17:28 It is certainly not a requirement for the host to have dinner.
17:32 And sometimes the finalists do like just, especially your out-of-area
17:36 finalists, like to get in town and get settled in.
17:38 And even any local or candidates that are in close to Central
17:44 Florida would like to have that evening to kind of prepare.
17:46 But having a host or two hosts have dinner with each finalist.
17:51 So if you have four finalists, you would need eight hosts.
17:55 That is an option.
17:57 If we look at April the 27th, which would be a Thursday, that is
18:02 the day that you would have your interviews for an hour and a
18:06 half with each of the four finalists.
18:08 The concept for that day is simply that the finalists would meet
18:13 here in the morning.
18:14 The option is they can have breakfast with their host prior to
18:18 the arrival time.
18:19 Or you can have a light continental breakfast here at this
18:23 facility because your interviews will be occurring here.
18:25 And let’s say we have the four finalists.
18:29 We would identify the finalists as finalists A, B, C, and D.
18:34 As the board is interviewing, as you can see, assuming you want
18:39 these times and all these times are flexible, if you begin
18:42 interviewing finalists A at 8:30, then you would finish finalists
18:47 A at 10:00.
18:47 And while the board is interviewing finalists A, then finalists
18:52 B, C, and D would be potentially on tours with the two hosts.
19:00 You could have meetings set up with department staff here that
19:05 each of the finalists could go around and visit with for 30, 45
19:09 minutes while another finalist is being interviewed.
19:13 So you have the option of kind of close community tours.
19:17 I know we can’t go too far because, you know, you don’t have all
19:20 day to do this because they’ll have to come back for their
19:23 interviews.
19:23 Or you could do something on site here where maybe they do take
19:29 an hour tour of one of your closest schools and come back here
19:33 and maybe meet for 45 minutes with various departments and kind
19:37 of rotate through that.
19:38 So we just like to have some activities for those three
19:42 remaining finalists who are not being interviewed to have some
19:46 time with staff and/or touring around.
19:48 Lunch could be onsite here for the board as you kind of go
19:53 through the day with your interviews.
19:56 If you do decide to do tours outside of the person who’s being
20:00 interviewed, the tour host could maybe stop and have lunch with
20:05 a candidate if they’re out touring.
20:07 So that’s an option as well.
20:10 That evening, what we would have the board consider, if you wish,
20:14 is to maybe have a community meet and greet.
20:17 This facility could be, this room could be a good room for that
20:22 or another venue that you might want to identify.
20:25 But the concept for that evening, as we’ve spoken about before,
20:29 is we would have the four finalists here.
20:32 We would kind of sequester the finalists in the back somewhere
20:35 and each finalist comes out and gives an eight to ten minute
20:39 intro of him or herself.
20:40 And then the next finalist comes up, we rotate through the finalists,
20:44 and after that, then this room would kind of be open for, you
20:49 know, four finalists to be in four corners of the room.
20:52 And then the community who comes to that meet and greet can mingle
20:56 around and speak with the finalists to get some first
21:00 impressions of those finalists.
21:02 What we would also do that evening is have a QR code available
21:05 where the members of the public could, on their phone, access
21:09 that code and submit any thoughts that they may have about the
21:13 candidates to you, the board members.
21:14 We would compile that and have it ready for you the first thing
21:18 the next morning before you start your one on one interviews.
21:21 So some of those comments might be the person in the community
21:25 might want to make some very positive comments about the
21:28 strengths of a candidate or two, or someone may have questions
21:32 about a candidate or two.
21:33 But that is another way for the public to be involved in
21:37 providing some feedback to the board during that meet and greet.
21:40 And depending on the time of that meet and greet, we can have a
21:44 light dinner for the finalist, you know, kind of maybe a box
21:48 launch type thing or something prior to or after the community
21:52 meeting greet, depending on the time that we finalize.
21:54 The very next day, which would be Friday, the April 28th, that
22:00 would be your day for your one on one interview for an hour with
22:04 each finalist.
22:05 If you look at that sample chart, you’ll kind of see how that
22:09 lays out.
22:09 That morning, again, it could be breakfast with a host and or a
22:14 light continental breakfast here where we would have all the
22:17 finalists here.
22:17 Those activities would all be in this facility on that last day.
22:22 So as four board members are interviewing the four finalists for
22:27 an hour, one on one each, then you would have one board member
22:30 that would have a blank period of time because you only have
22:34 four finalists.
22:34 So if you look at the far right box there, which would be that
22:38 Friday, April the 28th, you’ll kind of get a feel for how the
22:43 times would lay out for the board members to interview four
22:47 finalists for an hour each.
22:48 If by chance the board selected five finalists, then you would
22:52 have five interviews an hour and hour back to back.
22:55 And we’ll give you about a 15 minute break in between those.
22:58 So that’s kind of a quick overview of what our thoughts are for
23:02 those two days of on site interviews.
23:04 And we would certainly like to begin to get your input on, you
23:08 know, on the first day, do you want to consider the community
23:12 reception?
23:12 Would you like to have, you know, lunches kind of on site,
23:16 except for those people who might be out touring?
23:18 Would you want to have the tour concept with staff people?
23:23 You can have one staff member and one business community leader
23:27 as a host together.
23:28 Your staff person would kind of know the district, would kind of
23:32 be the driver.
23:33 And your community person could be there to also discuss Brevard
23:41 County with those candidates.
23:43 That will also be a time that the candidates are kind of
23:47 interviewing Brevard as well, asking questions about some of the
23:51 facilities, some of the buildings, some of the challenges in
23:56 instruction or some of the positive things that are going on.
24:00 So it really is a good time for them to share some information.
24:04 So now keep in mind that we will be back on the April 4th and I’ll
24:10 bring this up again.
24:12 I’ll have a more refined schedule for you then based on your
24:16 input today.
24:17 So if I could at this point get any thoughts that the board
24:21 might have on some of the functions surrounding these two days.
24:25 Thank you.
24:26 I think if you would walk through the first one, you said you
24:29 were interested in us giving you feedback.
24:30 on was the community reception.
24:31 If we can just go through each one of those like that.
24:34 So I think if you guys are interested in a community reception,
24:38 the way that he laid out, we can discuss that now.
24:44 I am.
24:45 No.
24:46 Well, my only thought on the community reception is that if that’s
24:49 not the selected candidate and now we have presented them to the
24:50 community, could that have a negative recourse for us?
24:54 If the community falls in love with him and he’s not who we
24:57 select.
24:57 Yeah, I think in the past.
24:58 So I’ve been a part of Bingley when he was here years ago.
25:03 And so they had a community where they both were in the same
25:07 room.
25:07 People came and meet and greet and it went pretty well.
25:09 So all of the candidates would be in the room for the community
25:12 reception.
25:12 Is that right?
25:13 Yes, ma’am.
25:14 Okay.
25:15 And you can do different locations, but it’s a way for them to
25:18 kind of meet and I think it’s open for the community to actually
25:21 get to them.
25:22 Like we’re always going to have people that have their opinions.
25:24 Right.
25:25 But I think that it allows people in the community to go.
25:28 I’m wondering if the way, and you guys, you know, you’re the
25:32 experts in this.
25:33 I’m wondering if the way that you do the QR code and input you
25:36 is, so it’s not so much a vote.
25:38 We’re not necessarily taking a community vote, right?
25:40 You’re asking for feedback that will come to us anonymously, but
25:45 we’re not asking, we’re not going to do a poll of everybody who
25:48 comes.
25:48 No, ma’am.
25:49 Not at all.
25:50 It’s simply an opportunity for the community to kind of express
25:53 their thoughts about, again, the strengths of a candidate or,
25:58 you know, any concerns.
25:59 You know, potentially someone might say, does this candidate
26:04 have enough experience in, you know, finance management?
26:07 Or it’s just thoughts from the community.
26:11 It is no ranking.
26:12 It is no voting.
26:13 It is simply another chance for them to give input to the board
26:17 on their thoughts about certain candidates.
26:19 And we have had it with, you know, kind of an open setting like
26:23 this.
26:23 We’ve also had it where they would kind of have rooms assigned.
26:27 Depends on the facility.
26:29 And the community kind of goes from room to room.
26:32 But we just kind of make that decision based on the facility and
26:36 what might work best here in Brevard.
26:38 But we found that it’s been very well received by the community.
26:43 Does each candidate get the opportunity to, like, get up and
26:47 speak or how does that, what does it look like?
26:50 Well, to start off the program, we’ll basically just have each
26:54 finalist come up and give a quick six to eight minute intro of
26:58 him or herself.
26:58 So if we have it at this facility, you may have, you know, 70 or
27:03 so people sitting here.
27:04 Each finalist comes up to the microphone.
27:06 You have six or eight minutes.
27:08 We then take that finalist out the door.
27:11 Another finalist comes in.
27:12 They have six to eight minutes.
27:14 We rotate through with the four finalists.
27:17 Some districts, we’ve had questions for each finalist.
27:22 After they do the five to eight minute intro, six to eight
27:26 minute, then they respond to one question.
27:28 We’ll kind of emcee that just to kind of get the community, give
27:34 them experience with how they may respond to questions kind of
27:37 off the cuff.
27:38 Okay.
27:39 No, I like it.
27:41 Anybody else?
27:42 Good.
27:43 Good, Ms. Jenkins.
27:44 And what you can also do is you can also just get them into
27:48 different rooms.
27:49 You can give everybody a number and then they can rotate in a
27:52 number fashion.
27:52 You know what I mean?
27:53 There’s all kinds of ways to do this.
27:54 Right, right.
27:55 Because what will happen is the first guy that speaks will then
27:57 go and then the entire place will go follow him.
27:59 Right.
28:00 And then they’ll be like, you know what I mean?
28:01 And then it just gets kind of crazy.
28:02 But I really appreciate you making that offer.
28:04 What’s the next one that you need direction on?
28:06 Basically, you’ll want to entertain the idea of having host.
28:11 I do.
28:12 I think that’s great.
28:13 And I was actually, while you were talking about having two
28:16 hosts, maybe a staff member
28:17 and a community member, I wonder if we could pull the community
28:22 members from our chambers.
28:23 We have four chambers.
28:24 Plus, you know, we’ve got the Space Coast, whatever it’s called,
28:29 from the EDC.
28:30 I think that would be great because you’re talking about trying
28:33 to sell Brevard.
28:33 Right.
28:34 That’s their job.
28:35 Right.
28:36 And they may be trying to sell certain parts of Brevard.
28:38 But I think that might be a great source for us to pull those
28:43 community people to team up with a staff member.
28:45 Right.
28:46 And, Ms. Campbell, it does help really kind of keep that
28:50 community bond with the district.
28:51 So you would have maybe one district office, maybe executive
28:56 level cabinet member who’s familiar with the district and drive
29:00 around to the places that we can get to in time.
29:02 And we can kind of work with your folks here to determine what
29:06 would be an appropriate route.
29:08 Can they visit this school real quick, drive by the government
29:12 buildings, or whatever would allow them in that hour and a half,
29:15 depending on their schedule.
29:16 And if we had a community person with that, that would be a
29:20 great mix.
29:21 Yeah.
29:22 No, I like that.
29:23 And I like the idea of having the community host.
29:25 I mean, I just, I would just offer that, that calling on our
29:30 chambers, if the, if the CEOs of the, the directors of the
29:33 chambers would be the people.
29:34 But, you know, I know they’re very busy people that they could
29:37 kind of designate someone for us, depending on how many we need,
29:39 three, four, or five.
29:39 I think that would be a great idea.
29:44 Jenkins.
29:45 Yeah.
29:46 I think it’s great.
29:47 Thank you.
29:48 And I think, I think my suggestion would be, even if you had
29:52 more than two and you just had three moving around, because you
29:55 have like the zoo, you have Linda Weatherman, you have the
29:58 chamber presidents, you have career source, you have like Vieira
30:00 company, some very active people.
30:01 And we had spoken before about having them do videos to push out.
30:05 And we had spoken just a minute ago that in the event, we had
30:09 kind of said that would be okay to have like Linda Weatherman
30:12 and some of the others make a video of promoting who we are and
30:16 tell a little bit about it.
30:17 Put it on our website.
30:18 And when they come in, they’ll meet them and then those people
30:21 can do it.
30:21 So I think it’s a really good, um, and I wouldn’t hold it to
30:24 just two, just in case there’s some really good people.
30:27 Maybe three would be tops because four people can fit in a car.
30:30 Yeah.
30:31 And John, do you want us to identify these individuals by April
30:34 4th when you come back or what?
30:35 That would be great if we could.
30:36 And what I’ll do, I will take and refine this schedule with a
30:40 little more specificity in it.
30:41 Okay.
30:42 With regard to times and things of that nature.
30:45 Um, build in the community reception, build some, uh, some
30:50 window times for tours, depending on what candidate A, B, C or D
30:54 or that schedule might be.
30:54 I’ll do that for, again, schedule three, four and five in case
30:58 we have three finalists, four or five.
31:00 So if you could maybe at the next meeting, which is again, April
31:04 the 4th, the next time we meet, if we could have, uh, some names
31:08 of community people and even the staff people that we would need.
31:11 So anywhere from three staff people to five staff people and
31:15 community people, that would be okay for three, four or five
31:19 finalists.
31:20 Uh, and like, uh, the chair says, we can have more than, you
31:24 know, one business person in, in, in the vehicle.
31:27 Can I make a suggestion?
31:28 Absolutely.
31:29 Um, Dr. Schiller, since this, that this kind of community
31:33 partner issue falls direct.
31:34 Yeah.
31:35 Sorry.
31:36 All right.
31:37 Since this community relations, um, kind of partnership issue
31:41 falls under the area of GCR, could we ask Mr. Bruhn to help
31:44 identify, um, since we already have the date?
31:46 Yes, of course.
31:47 Mr. Bruhn and his staff, uh, have responsibility in this area,
31:52 uh, to work that through should you so desire.
31:55 Okay.
31:57 To get those community partners for us.
31:59 Okay.
32:00 Great.
32:01 All right.
32:03 Um.
32:06 Uh, and any suggested people that we have to, you know what I
32:09 mean?
32:09 I think that would be appropriate.
32:10 Everybody.
32:11 Okay.
32:12 What’s the next one you need?
32:13 Uh, those are, like I said, this was just our initial, a little
32:17 feedback from the board.
32:18 So again, I’ll take this now, move back, uh, come up with three
32:22 more refined schedules, three,
32:23 four or five, and, uh, maybe refine some more details at our
32:27 next meeting.
32:28 But this certainly is a great help for me to get started on the
32:32 schedules and, uh, working with, uh, your staff as well.
32:34 Thank you.
32:36 Thank you, sir.
32:37 On the three date.
32:38 Before you walk off.
32:39 I, I did have some concerns with the three finalist schedule.
32:41 That’s a long day.
32:43 Um.
32:44 I know it’s possible if we start at 7:30 in the morning and we’re
32:49 ending the, I just, I wonder
32:49 if it might be better if we have three finalists to transition
32:53 that to follow the four finalist pattern.
32:56 I mean, even if there’s a little bit more sitting around, I just
32:59 hate to kill somebody, you know, and all the staff who have to
33:04 get them everywhere by trying to cram it all into one day when
33:06 we already have the days blocked off.
33:07 Yes, we do.
33:08 And that’s always a good thing with two days blocked off.
33:10 The finalists will know it could, they have to commit to two
33:13 days.
33:13 So I’ll, uh, do away with this one day and, uh, look for one for
33:17 two.
33:17 Okay.
33:18 Yes.
33:19 I would, I would, uh, I would hesitate to not do it in one day
33:22 because of calendars and commitments and stuff like that.
33:25 But if there are individuals that, you know what I mean, we
33:28 might have three people that are running other school districts
33:31 that would love the opportunity to come get interviewed and go
33:34 out.
33:34 Um, I, I don’t know.
33:36 I mean, I’m, I hear what you’re saying about the three, but I’m
33:39 looking at it.
33:39 And if we can get it all done in one day, then why is it we
33:42 would move to two?
33:42 Just, just to remind you, the ad actually says they have to be
33:45 available for-
33:45 Oh, absolutely.
33:46 Interviews on the 27th and the 28th of April.
33:48 So they would be prepared and we won’t know if we’re going to
33:52 have three finalists, uh, or four or five until April the-
33:57 18th?
33:58 18th.
33:59 Yes.
34:00 So I, it’s not a lot of, um, time to adjust the calendar at that
34:05 point.
34:05 I mean, I’m okay.
34:06 It doesn’t matter to me.
34:07 It’s just getting it done in one day as opposed to two, it’s six
34:10 or one half dozen.
34:11 If you look at it, one day starts us at 7:30, finishes at like
34:15 eight o’clock.
34:16 You know what I mean?
34:17 So if you-
34:18 Well, then I’ll start-
34:19 Not for them.
34:20 Yeah.
34:21 Right.
34:22 So I’m going to, uh, for the sake of brevity and time for this
34:25 workshop, I’m going to ask that we don’t respond to each other
34:28 every single time someone makes a comment.
34:29 Um, I’m with Miss Campbell on this.
34:32 Um, I, I think it, it needs to be more than the one day.
34:36 Um, if we don’t remember the last process that we went through,
34:41 it was, it was way too quick.
34:42 It was way too long.
34:43 And quite frankly, after you do those group interviews, you need
34:46 time to kind of process what was discussed and presented in
34:49 order for you to generate more questions or even kind of go home
34:52 and do a little bit more research on your own.
34:53 So, um, I prefer the other ones.
34:57 Yeah.
34:59 Okay.
35:00 So I guess that’s a majority of people.
35:03 We’re good to go to those two days.
35:05 Okay.
35:06 Two days.
35:07 All right.
35:08 Yes, sir.
35:09 What else do you need?
35:10 That’s it for me.
35:11 Thank you.
35:12 You want us to start sending you our questions now or?
35:15 Okay.
35:17 Thank you guys.
35:22 Thank you gentlemen.
35:23 Okay.
35:24 Next topic is board policy 5136 wireless communications devices.
35:28 Uh, I think you guys have all had a chance to review them.
35:30 Uh, it’s pretty much the same thing that we’ve had before.
35:32 Are there any questions on it?
35:34 No.
35:35 Same one we agreed to.
35:38 It’s just coming back for us.
35:40 All good.
35:41 I don’t even know if you have to get up.
35:43 Yeah.
35:44 I think we’re all good.
35:45 Mr.
35:46 Uh, Bruhn.
35:47 Would you just outline for the public the next steps that we
35:51 would follow with this policy
35:52 with regard to, um, moving forward?
35:55 Mr. Gibbs.
35:56 Yes.
35:57 Um, Mr. Gibbs, Mr. Gibbs, Mr. Gibbs, the parliamentarian, he can
36:01 do it.
36:01 Uh, yeah.
36:02 The, uh, next step would be public hearing number one at the
36:06 next board meeting, followed by public
36:06 hearing number two, the following board meeting, and that would
36:10 be the one that the final approval
36:11 comes in it.
36:12 And those two have to be seven days apart?
36:15 Is that how it works?
36:16 The first public hearing, you have to have, uh, at minimum 14
36:21 days public notice from the
36:23 run date of the ad.
36:24 And then the second public hearing has to occur no less than 28
36:27 days from the running of the
36:29 ad.
36:30 28 days from the original ad?
36:32 From, yeah, whenever your ad noticing it was.
36:34 So yeah, we do it all in one.
36:35 So it would be 14 days to the first and then 28 days to the
36:39 second.
36:39 So conceptually you can pass it within 28 days as long as you
36:43 notice it inside of there
36:44 and we’re good to hear.
36:45 Brevard public schools procedure has an extra workshop built in
36:49 so that like this one where
36:51 if you did say we want to make changes, you’re still outside of
36:54 rulemaking and you can make
36:55 those changes at the first public hearing.
36:57 You make a change.
36:58 We got to start over.
36:59 Yep.
37:00 So we should be good.
37:01 Anybody have any questions on a topic?
37:04 Okay.
37:05 Right.
37:06 No good.
37:07 Okay.
37:08 Moving on.
37:09 Um, next topic is board policy 25 21 structural materials
37:13 program.
37:13 Um, does anybody wish to start the discussion?
37:19 Mr. Trent.
37:21 Yes.
37:22 So I just want to start by saying thanks for your patience on
37:27 this, but we want to get it right.
37:28 And, uh, I had handed out some notes that I want to make sure if
37:40 we have the support of the board, uh, to include some of these
37:43 and, and some of the rationale as to why.
37:46 So, um, oh, it seems like they’re, I’ll let you guys get ready
37:53 or have it all set.
37:55 I had sent in an email pretty much.
37:57 So, uh, I don’t, I don’t have to, uh, start from the beginning,
38:02 but I will hear, um, books in the formal review process, uh, are
38:07 to be listed online along with some books that have finished the
38:10 process.
38:10 Some might refer to this and I’m not, but to a do not buy list,
38:14 but it’s actually just a list of, uh, books that have been, you
38:17 know, uh, informally removed or formally removed.
38:20 But for new teachers coming in, uh, it would be nice to see what,
38:25 what a list, uh, especially when we’re dealing with classroom
38:29 libraries, you know, it would be good to have.
38:31 But, uh, essentially it would look like, and that’s the example,
38:35 whatever book, you know, that’s pending a, a book committee
38:39 review.
38:39 Uh, another title, that one was deselected by the book committee
38:43 due to violation and it would be specific.
38:45 But it would have reason, a title and the reason why it’s, it’s,
38:49 it’s at where it’s at in the process.
38:50 But that would be, if we can have something that refers to that,
38:54 I think that would help all of us moving forward.
38:57 And we can handle these one at a time, so I’m sure you’re going
39:00 to have some questions or if there’s any, any questions on it up
39:03 here.
39:03 Uh, Dr. Sullivan, would you wish to respond?
39:09 Actually, I already met, uh, prior to this discussion to add the
39:13 informal list on the website.
39:15 Um, however, with informal requests, we don’t always get reasons.
39:19 Um, but if we do receive a reason, we can certainly add that if
39:24 that works for the board.
39:26 Any objection to showing the reason?
39:31 I’m sorry, back up.
39:33 So I, this particular thing is asking us to put a list online of
39:39 the books that are in the process and that are, have completed
39:43 the process.
39:44 I’m not sure where the, I must have missed something you said
39:47 about reasons.
39:47 Uh, that was brought up.
39:49 The reason would be seen next to it.
39:51 So it’s not just titles, cause we want to see where it’s at in
39:54 the process.
39:54 If it’s just, if it was removed during the informal process, uh,
39:58 it’s good to know because it’s, that those, I don’t want to say
40:03 those books could be hidden, but there could be book, uh,
40:06 teachers at schools that don’t know why, um, a book was removed
40:09 from another school.
40:10 So it’s, it’s, it’s to keep track of a larger, uh, list of books,
40:14 uh, that they could refer to if that was a new teacher coming in
40:18 or a media specialist.
40:19 It would be nice to have because there, there is no record of
40:21 that.
40:21 If right now, if, if, if a media specialist takes a book out of
40:25 their library, it’s like a tree falling in a forest and nobody
40:28 heard it.
40:28 Uh, if you’re on the other side of the county.
40:30 So it’s just a way of keeping track of that.
40:32 And if there is a, that’s what Ms. Dr. Sullivan is saying, if
40:35 there, sometimes there’s not a, a, a reason given, just a, the
40:39 librarian says, yep, it’s, it’s off.
40:40 But if there is a, a reason that would be.
40:42 Like the media specialist reasons.
40:43 Sorry.
40:44 Yes.
40:45 Got to get my brain wrapped.
40:46 Okay.
40:47 Um, I, is there, would this be duplicating something for the pro
40:50 in the state processes?
40:51 Because it seems like there is, um, there’s a new, the, the DOE,
40:57 new DOE requirement for districts to report for them to keep
41:01 just a list of books that have been removed.
41:03 Do they have to have gone through a formal process?
41:06 Um, what is, what is the state requirement from the DOE?
41:09 Um, so that’s a good question.
41:12 Yes.
41:13 We’ve had to submit those that went through the formal process
41:17 and what the outcomes of those are.
41:18 Okay.
41:19 What we’ve done on our website, again, just for the sake of
41:22 transparency and clarity for all, we’ve listed that information
41:26 separate from this discussion.
41:28 We found that it would be helpful to our community to also put
41:31 those that have already been, um, through informal review to, to
41:35 what he’s saying, because honestly, I’d rather have it there
41:39 than, um, lots and lots of requests.
41:42 Like we would rather just be transparent and public and they are
41:46 so there, we do anticipate a separate process to continue some
41:50 more, uh, submitting to the state, but I don’t think it’s duplicative.
41:54 I think it’s really easy to have the information on our local
41:57 website, current and accurate for our families, if they want to
42:01 review that.
42:01 And I, I’m inferring that’s what Mr. Trent’s referring to.
42:04 Yeah.
42:06 Thank you, Mr. Trent.
42:08 Any objections to Mr. Trent’s request?
42:10 I think we’re good.
42:11 I have something to say.
42:12 Yes, Ms. Jenkins.
42:13 Um, I’m just, I’m a little, I’m a little confused.
42:16 I feel like, um, part of this request is contradictory to
42:20 something that was discussed by the majority of the board
42:24 previously, in which there was a conversation to remove the
42:27 opinion of media specialists from the book review committee.
42:30 And so now we’re saying we want to publish books that were
42:34 voluntarily removed by media specialists onto a website.
42:37 Um, and I feel like we’re saying we trust them when they want to
42:41 remove books, but we don’t trust them when we want to keep them.
42:44 And so I don’t understand this contradiction.
42:47 Uh, I don’t see the, the purpose of that, um, or the value of it.
42:53 Really what it is, is it’s autonomy for that media specialist,
42:57 which is what I always fight for.
42:58 I don’t see the need of putting a list together of voluntary
43:03 polls from media specialists.
43:05 If they were concerned so deeply, I’m sure they would bring it
43:09 to their advisors and people above them as well.
43:11 Okay, Ms. Jenkins.
43:12 Um, any other further comment on it?
43:14 Just as a reminder, the involuntary process also involves the
43:17 principal.
43:17 So it’s not necessarily just the opinion of the, of the media
43:21 specialists.
43:22 Good to go.
43:23 Right.
43:24 Absolutely.
43:25 But we removed everyone except board designees from the book
43:28 review committee is my point.
43:29 All right.
43:30 Thank you.
43:31 Next topic.
43:32 So the, um, yes, we have consensus for more members.
43:38 Thank you.
43:39 I’m sorry.
43:40 I’ll do that for you every time.
43:41 Go ahead.
43:42 Um, next it’s, it’s actually in order, uh, that informal process
43:45 that we were talking about.
43:46 Um, I don’t believe we’ve actually talked about a timeframe and
43:51 I, I, I believe one calendar
43:53 week would be a good timeframe, uh, because it could just sit
43:56 there.
43:56 What’s that stuff?
43:57 How much time do you think is better?
44:00 Uh, one calendar week would be extraordinarily difficult.
44:03 Um, oftentimes they come in with multiple titles, um, and the
44:08 time to turn it around for office
44:10 to the principals and media specialists to actually read the
44:13 feedback and look at the titles.
44:15 Um, it would be very, very difficult to turn it around in a week.
44:21 Um, I would suggest 30 days and knowing that we would more than
44:27 likely, um, be sooner than
44:28 that, but sometimes the lists are rather lengthy and we’re
44:32 asking them in the middle of a full
44:34 date to pull it.
44:35 It’s important and we want them to pull it and look at it.
44:38 Um, so I certainly think adding a timeline would be appropriate,
44:42 but one week would be extraordinarily
44:43 difficult.
44:44 Okay.
44:45 And I do appreciate their time now that they’re, many of them
44:50 are alone in the media centers
44:51 by themselves.
44:52 Um, the issue was not having one versus having one.
44:56 And I think you can agree with that.
44:58 Um, I, I, I’m okay with 30 days.
45:00 What do you guys?
45:01 I think a timeline is good, so 30 days.
45:05 Any other comments?
45:06 Um, I think, um, the question on the 30 days is, is that in the
45:11 event that we have a lot
45:12 of them, the issue is, is to expand with the multiple committees
45:16 so that we could then respond
45:18 to multiples.
45:19 Does that make sense to you?
45:20 Um, in, in that initial informal process, I am first working
45:25 with our media assist, our
45:27 media specialists at the district level to check the locations.
45:30 That typically takes a couple of days.
45:32 Okay.
45:33 And then I’m emailing the principals to collaborate with their
45:36 media specialists and make a determination
45:39 if based on the feedback in an informal review, do they want to
45:42 make any changes to that book
45:43 in their collection?
45:44 Sure.
45:45 It isn’t until a formal is requested that those other things
45:49 begin.
45:49 Right.
45:50 And I, and I just wanted to say that I think that if in the
45:53 event that we get more of them,
45:55 that we have the plan in place to expand.
45:58 If we do, we, I don’t think we’ve had that opportunity yet, but
46:02 if we do, we’d be there.
46:03 That’s all.
46:04 All right.
46:05 Sorry.
46:06 Before you go on to the next one, we, there was, you kind of had
46:10 two requests in that first
46:10 paragraph and I great, we gave consensus on the first two lines,
46:13 but I don’t know that
46:13 we talked really about the second two lines.
46:15 Um, you said books.
46:16 It says books on this list that were either voluntary removed or
46:20 removed after formal review.
46:20 We’ll need permission from the school board and school principal
46:22 before they can be brought
46:24 back in the library classroom.
46:25 We didn’t, you, we didn’t necessarily discuss that.
46:29 Good point.
46:30 Um, are you still making that request?
46:33 Yes.
46:34 I think we, yeah, it was mentioned not until the back part.
46:38 Um, but yes, yeah, that, that as well.
46:40 I mean, if it’s out, we, we certainly don’t want to anyone other
46:44 than the school board or
46:45 that committee, which is really the school board, um, to be
46:50 asked to put that back in.
46:51 For example, if there’s a, a book that’s on this list that
46:54 really was inappropriate at an elementary
46:56 school or junior high, but a high school, uh, now sees that and
47:01 says, no, we, we want it.
47:02 Can we bring it in?
47:03 You know, we would, we could easily approve that.
47:06 So yeah, I, I, I believe we need to be the ones, uh, approving
47:11 books to be put back into circulation.
47:13 Can I ask a point, a clarification point?
47:15 You had mentioned the school board or our committee.
47:18 Are you saying that you would like these to the finalization of
47:21 movement would come back
47:22 to the school board or you would like it to be the school board
47:26 committee that we have
47:26 made up of our members?
47:27 No, I think what’s, what’s written is good.
47:29 It’s a school board.
47:30 Um, it says and school principal, but we could always just have
47:34 the insight from that principal.
47:35 But I, I do believe that, uh, we’re the ones responsible for it.
47:38 So it should, it should start and stop here of reinstating the
47:41 books.
47:41 So in the event that the committee makes a decision one way or
47:45 the other, the book still
47:45 comes back to us for final approval or if it, they go against
47:50 what?
47:50 So what, I think what Ms. Campbell was talking about and myself
47:53 here is if books are off,
47:54 they’re on that list.
47:55 If, if somebody’s petitioning, you know, to put them back into
47:59 schools, then that-
47:59 After eight years.
48:00 Yeah.
48:01 There’s a-
48:02 Yeah, there’s a-
48:03 The, the district material review committee’s determination is
48:06 valid for eight years.
48:06 Okay.
48:07 So I think you’re asking what happens after eight years.
48:09 If, does it mean that, and I had asked when we went through this
48:12 process originally, can
48:13 we have that list to stay?
48:14 It needs to be marked somehow so people know, hey, if you’re
48:17 about to bring this, this one
48:18 went through a challenge process however many years ago.
48:20 Right.
48:21 Um, but you’re asking for it to become, to come back if it’s on
48:25 that eight year determination,
48:27 um, that it, you know, that it does come through whatever
48:33 process in the school board.
48:33 It goes through border proof.
48:34 I, I wouldn’t say, I, the principal is important because I’m, I’m
48:37 just gonna throw it out that
48:38 we think about the school board how it is right now, but the
48:41 principals are responsible, um, in this policy and through state
48:45 law for what is in their collection.
48:46 Right.
48:47 So if, even if the school board were to say, okay, you can have
48:51 this book back in, the principal
48:51 still needs to have the authority to say, not my school because
48:55 I know my community.
48:56 So I think that, I think that level needs to stay in for our
49:01 individual schools.
49:02 Just point of clarification.
49:03 I’m sorry.
49:04 I just want to make sure we get it right.
49:05 All right.
49:06 We’re talking about after a formal review now.
49:10 I, I, I got, I thought, I just want to make sure we’re not
49:13 talking informal.
49:14 No.
49:15 It was formal.
49:16 At the end of the formal, at the end of the eight years.
49:18 Yes.
49:19 If an additional decision were to be made.
49:21 Yeah.
49:22 Perfect.
49:23 Got it.
49:24 Oh, wait, okay.
49:25 Well then we need to clarify because on the way you have it
49:26 written, it’s either voluntarily
49:27 removed, which would be an informal or removed after formal
49:30 review.
49:30 So what are we asking for?
49:40 Because a voluntarily removed or voluntary removal would mean
49:43 that.
49:43 If someone came back in and, and there’s not a time limit on it.
49:48 I don’t think.
49:50 If a principal and a media specialist pull a book and then that
49:56 ends the process.
49:57 If they’re all gone.
49:59 Unless they go through formal review.
50:01 Correct.
50:02 So, I mean, that, that, that is an area that you’d even question
50:06 of the need for an informal,
50:07 but to leave it in there for work for, for the, you know, for
50:13 obvious reasons.
50:15 The fear is, or it’s potential that it’s removed informally.
50:20 So does it still fall under the, the eight years?
50:25 If it doesn’t, that’s where the issue could come in.
50:29 It, it, it, it, it gets pulled two months later.
50:33 It shows up in another library.
50:34 It wasn’t formally pulled.
50:36 It wasn’t on a list formally.
50:38 I, I, I, I’m strong on the fact that any book that appears on
50:43 this list, formal or informal, it, in order for it to go back
50:48 into a school, it, it needs board approval.
50:51 How do we, how do we make that happen?
50:54 He’s right.
50:55 So when you think about the book that was pulled out of the
50:57 schools, it didn’t go through the formal review process that,
51:00 that had the pictures in it that were very descriptive.
51:02 That never went through the formal book review process.
51:05 So in essence, if that book doesn’t go through the formal review
51:09 process, can it just go back in now?
51:11 Because we haven’t formally said this book is not allowed to be
51:15 on this, on the shelf.
51:16 So that is a question that needs to be clarified.
51:19 I think we need to make sure the policy is very clear on that.
51:23 Yep.
51:24 So with your expertise, that, that’s our dilemma of having an
51:28 informal and a formal.
51:29 I even questioned, I talked to Mr. Gibbs earlier about the eight
51:33 years.
51:33 You know, we don’t put a time limit on our discipline policies.
51:36 I mean, if it’s deemed not appropriate for a school, it stays
51:41 inappropriate to that school and all our schools until it comes
51:46 back through our board.
51:47 So however we can make that happen.
51:50 The only caution is that with our informals, it’s not always
51:54 school by school.
51:55 And so there’s a potential for a title that is at five schools
52:02 and then four choose to pull it.
52:05 That’s when we give that information to the petitioner to decide
52:09 if they want to put it in the formal process.
52:11 So it’s okay with me.
52:13 I just want to point out that you might only have two
52:16 voluntarily and one voluntarily pull it.
52:18 And it might be a situation where, you know, it was at some
52:22 middle schools on a high school and the middle schools all
52:26 pulled it and the only one that’s left is a high school.
52:27 So the petitioner may say, you know, I, I, the main thing for me
52:31 is that it’s all documented, that it’s every book is labeled.
52:34 So that even the book that was pulled last school year, um, in,
52:37 in the involuntary process because the principals all said, no,
52:41 this isn’t long in schools.
52:41 We agree.
52:43 Then it’s labeled so that new media specialists, new principal
52:47 can go in and say, you know what, this proceed with caution.
52:52 I, I am, I absolutely value the informal process because many of
52:57 these times our principals and our media specialists, you know,
53:02 like I’ve said many times before, we, we don’t need to assume
53:06 that they knew it was in there.
53:07 Sometimes they didn’t know it was in there and they’re able to
53:10 take care of it right off the bat.
53:11 And we don’t have to go through a process and have, make people
53:14 read hundreds of pages of a book that’s highly inappropriate
53:16 sometimes.
53:16 You know, we, we don’t have to go through all that because they’re
53:19 taking care of it in the responsible way that they take care of
53:22 things.
53:22 And so the informal process is very valuable and I would hate to,
53:26 um, I, I don’t want it to remove it.
53:28 And, and, and of course if, if it is in, removed in an informal
53:32 way and somewhere down the road someone proceeds without looking,
53:37 you know, or, or they ignore the note or whatever that’s put in
53:39 there.
53:39 And, and, and someone brings it back and it can, it can go
53:42 through the challenge process again.
53:43 But honestly, where we are today, I just, I’m not gonna say it’s
53:48 impossible, but it’s highly unlikely.
53:49 If I can propose a suggestion, uh, many of you have seen the
53:54 list that I’ve used to track the books where they’re at crosses
53:59 off and those kinds of things.
54:00 We can just post that online.
54:01 I mean, if I’m, I’m tracking it anyway, and we can keep that
54:06 updated so that every person can see the circumstance.
54:10 Um, I, I, I just as soon be super duper transparent and keep
54:14 that list post online as well.
54:16 If that works.
54:17 Yeah.
54:18 That’s all the issue.
54:19 Good.
54:20 All right.
54:21 You okay with it?
54:22 Yep.
54:23 Jenkins.
54:24 Did you want to say anything?
54:25 No, Mr. Susan.
54:26 Okay.
54:27 All right.
54:28 Ready to move on to the next one.
54:29 Yep.
54:30 All right.
54:31 So the next one challenges here, let me get this challenges
54:36 should be allowed to be anonymous.
54:39 Now this is a question mark because I’m going to need some, I’m
54:42 going to need some help on this one, but, um, the best that we
54:48 possibly can.
54:49 Um, and for obvious reasons of backlash and just flat out
54:55 attacking, um, you know, our, our constituents out there for
55:00 just asking for the library, the media specialist in the school
55:04 to look at, um, the contents of a book.
55:06 We can give you examples of that, but if, uh, a petitioner
55:10 decides to submit anonymously, they’ll need to submit some type
55:14 of paperwork to Brevard Public Schools administration in the
55:17 form of the, uh, formal review paperwork.
55:18 Uh, and it maybe shows some type of ID that they are, you know,
55:22 somebody, you know, in our county, uh, but their name and
55:26 address will not be recorded or made available for public
55:29 requests.
55:30 Um, so Mr. Gibbs, how can we make this happen?
55:33 Yep.
55:34 And just so you guys know, the reason that we pulled it from
55:39 before was because many people from both sides were being
55:43 attacked with threats from social media.
55:45 And I was fearful that our staff would start to get that too.
55:48 And that’s why we originally pulled it back.
55:50 And then I asked Mr. Gibbs in that moment, I said, we’re going
55:54 to need to move on possibly trying to keep someone anonymous
55:56 there.
55:56 And he had said that it was very difficult.
55:59 Go ahead, Mr. Gibbs.
56:00 No, I think you’re talking about something different.
56:02 He’s wanting book challenges.
56:03 No, I know.
56:04 Someone filing a challenge to be anonymous.
56:05 Um, I don’t know that there’s as big of an issue with filing the
56:09 paperwork.
56:10 The problem I foresee is normally the challenger is able to be a
56:14 part of the process as outlined.
56:16 They get to come to the meeting, they get to address the
56:19 committee on why something is inappropriate and have their say
56:22 in that process.
56:23 If they’re anonymous and they don’t want to participate, then
56:27 that is not going to be available to the committee.
56:29 It’s just going to be a straight up, here’s what they filed and
56:33 now it’s going to be reviewed.
56:34 If we don’t have a record of it, there’s no public record.
56:38 So if we aren’t taking any information, we get public records
56:41 requests that are anonymous and the law allows that.
56:43 So I think the policy can allow for an anonymous challenge.
56:47 It’s just going to be a matter of making sure it’s done.
56:50 If they email it, it’s not anonymous anymore and there’s nothing
56:53 we can do about it.
56:54 Is there a way that you can take a look at it and make a
56:58 suggestion?
56:59 I think you can just say the district will accept anonymous
57:04 challenges and just caution that if you email it, it’s no longer
57:08 anonymous and that’s a public record.
57:09 So any email to the district, that’s why we have those warnings
57:13 on the bottom.
57:13 To that particular email address.
57:14 It’s a public record, yeah.
57:15 So if you email that paperwork from your email address with your
57:20 name on it, that’s a public record and it’s not going to be
57:23 anonymous.
57:23 It sounds like it’s something you can move on.
57:26 I have a suggestion.
57:30 I don’t like the idea of being anonymous.
57:33 I understand.
57:34 I’ve had conversations with the people who are being on contact
57:37 online or whatever.
57:37 I think the biggest issue was the address and phone number
57:39 because that’s what the form says.
57:40 I think we can easily remove the address and phone number from
57:44 the process as long as there is a point of contact, a good email
57:47 address.
57:47 But let me ask this question first before I keep going.
57:52 Is there anything in our policy that would prohibit a board
57:56 member from bringing a book challenge?
57:58 I don’t think there’s anything in policy that would prohibit.
58:01 I’m going to say that.
58:02 I say that because if someone really has a problem with bringing
58:06 that, they’re afraid of bringing it for themselves, they can
58:09 pass it on to someone who’s a little more bold.
58:11 And if it is seriously an issue beyond that, they could even
58:15 come to one of the five of us and say, would you put the
58:17 challenge in?
58:17 But the idea of anonymously, I mean, it’s kind of like when
58:21 people put an anonymous note in the offering plate at church, I
58:26 didn’t like your sermon.
58:26 You know, I mean, you know, just come on, own up.
58:29 But present the challenge.
58:31 Sorry for the church references, but this is the world that I’ve
58:34 lived in for 25 years.
58:35 But, you know, just I think we can eliminate, you know, people
58:41 do get concerned with their safety, especially when addresses
58:44 are on there.
58:44 Right.
58:45 So I think we can take care of that without having to make it
58:47 completely anonymous.
58:48 But there’s other alternatives to people who are afraid to speak
58:53 up.
58:53 So, Mr. Gibbs, what I hear is, yeah, we can have it anonymous as
58:57 long as there’s a contact, which is an email address.
58:59 If you have an email address and there’s communications going
59:03 back and forth, those are public records.
59:04 So it’s not, there’s no exemption for those.
59:07 So if there’s communication going back and forth between someone
59:10 challenging, that is a public record.
59:12 So it is not going to be anonymous.
59:14 But the actual idea that somebody can put together a email that
59:18 is non-binding to their name and identifying would be possible.
59:22 They just have to communicate through that email.
59:24 If they have an anonymized email address, then yeah, it doesn’t
59:27 say their name or anything.
59:28 Right.
59:29 They could potentially do that.
59:30 Absolutely.
59:31 We do have a requirement for it to be a resident.
59:34 Right.
59:35 And that’s what he was saying.
59:36 They can, they have to come in and show ID to drop off the
59:39 paperwork at the district office.
59:41 So the staff, whoever’s accepting it, would have to verify that
59:45 information upon receipt.
59:46 They just will not document the name or anything.
59:49 So.
59:50 If they want to go through that.
59:52 But I think, to be honest with you, what Ms. Campbell was saying
59:55 is good too, is that they have the opportunity to bring it to us.
59:57 And they should, but if they, again, if they are allowed to send
1:00:01 it with an email and the cited reasons why, and they could even
1:00:04 follow up with one of us in that case as well.
1:00:07 But given that opportunity, if we can put that into, that would
1:00:12 be, that would be great.
1:00:14 I just want to remind everyone about one of the counties that
1:00:19 received hundreds and hundreds of requests because of that loophole.
1:00:24 Um, and so you could very much be setting up chaos for no reason.
1:00:31 Um, I also would argue that, uh, the people who have sent lists
1:00:36 and lists and lists to provide public schools have publicized
1:00:39 that they did that as well.
1:00:40 So, um, I’m, I’m with Ms. Campbell on this one.
1:00:45 If somebody has something they’re really concerned about, they’re
1:00:48 either going to say it themselves to have somebody else say it
1:00:50 for them, or they’re going to reach out to somebody at the
1:00:53 district via telephone first and have a conversation about their
1:00:55 concern before they put it in writing.
1:00:56 Um, I don’t, I don’t know if this is a real issue.
1:00:59 I think it’s going to cause more problems.
1:01:02 I mean, um, so you have Ms. Campbell and Ms. Jenkins are against
1:01:06 it.
1:01:06 Uh, Ms. Wright.
1:01:07 I, I hear what you guys are saying on both the ends of this, but
1:01:18 I also understand the idea of protecting someone’s identity
1:01:22 because of the backlash that they take from the community
1:01:24 whenever they’re looking at this.
1:01:24 So, um, I would just say I’m in favor of an anonymous thing of
1:01:30 being allowed to be anonymous.
1:01:33 Um, and then also again, submit that to the, to the board.
1:01:37 If you have a request and you’re afraid of your identity and you
1:01:41 maybe want to go that route, submit it to all of us and let us
1:01:44 formally put that forward instead.
1:01:45 Uh, or one of us, any of us, if they want to.
1:01:47 So, uh, I’m in favor of allowing it there to be anonymous.
1:01:51 I think it would need to be stated very clearly that if they do
1:01:55 it that way, they’re not going to get the chance to make their
1:01:57 presentation.
1:01:57 Right.
1:01:58 At the meeting.
1:01:59 So it’ll just be up to.
1:02:00 Well, and I would also say that the board members not going to
1:02:04 make that presentation for them either.
1:02:05 If, if they went through one of us, right.
1:02:07 So they lose the ability to have presentation at the book
1:02:11 challenging.
1:02:12 Okay.
1:02:13 So I’m in favor of it also.
1:02:14 So we’ll move forward with it.
1:02:15 Next up.
1:02:16 All right.
1:02:17 So here, uh, books that are informal.
1:02:20 The books that are in formal review that do not have
1:02:23 documentation of cited passages that demonstrate possible
1:02:25 violation of items listed under step two section E can be kept
1:02:29 on the shelves to the end of the formal review.
1:02:33 So again, these are books that are going into the formal review,
1:02:39 but maybe the, the challenger just said title ABC, but there’s
1:02:44 no documentation up to, or cited why that they’re even
1:02:48 challenging it.
1:02:49 Uh, that there’s no need to pull those books off the shelves.
1:02:54 Uh, if, if there’s no reason given that they shouldn’t be there
1:02:58 in the first place, because that, that could really stop the
1:03:03 needless reviews or challenges if they’re not stating why.
1:03:07 Because again, we could have an empty library if that’s, if that’s
1:03:12 the case.
1:03:12 So these are examples that have been brought up.
1:03:14 So I’m a little unclear between the informal and formal, the
1:03:18 change that you guys had just previously requested is once we
1:03:22 get a formal request, it gets pulled off the shelf.
1:03:25 Are we changing that or are.
1:03:28 So, go ahead.
1:03:31 The formal requests that are coming to you are giving you
1:03:34 evidence of what’s in the book on why the formal request is
1:03:36 being made, correct?
1:03:37 Correct.
1:03:38 Okay.
1:03:39 So as long as that’s substantiated and it’s with the request,
1:03:42 then that that’s, is that what you’re concerned about?
1:03:44 Are you saying you’re worried that somebody’s just going to
1:03:47 throw a title out there and now that book is pulled, even though
1:03:49 there’s nothing that is in that book that’s being proven that it
1:03:53 could possibly be harmful?
1:03:54 So in the form, part of the form is them filling out the reason
1:03:58 for the, the request for it to go to formal.
1:04:01 Can we make something that says that they have to cite like the,
1:04:06 the page, the, whatever it is that they’re concerned about on
1:04:10 why they’re pushing forward with the formal?
1:04:12 Sure.
1:04:13 I mean, we can do whatever you guys want.
1:04:14 So, I just want to be clear because we haven’t pulled books for
1:04:18 informal.
1:04:19 The board last time said they have to turn that form and then we’re
1:04:22 pulling the books.
1:04:23 So you’re saying in some cases when they turn in the form, we
1:04:26 won’t pull the books.
1:04:27 I just want to make sure I understand.
1:04:28 So can I, can I ask you a question and make sure I’m
1:04:30 understanding what you’re asking?
1:04:31 So for example, if someone just said, I have an objection to
1:04:35 green eggs and ham.
1:04:36 Right.
1:04:37 We’re not going to start the formal process.
1:04:37 If they haven’t cited on page 30 of green eggs and ham, this is
1:04:46 violates whatever.
1:04:49 Is that?
1:04:50 Yeah.
1:04:51 Of all the concerns, this is one that’s pretty low because the
1:04:55 book review committee can put that right back on the shelves
1:04:59 quickly, but to make sure that it doesn’t turn into something
1:05:02 larger.
1:05:02 Right.
1:05:03 Might I suggest we could, we could asterisk that part of the
1:05:07 form and say, this is required.
1:05:09 And, and that way we just mark kind of like, you know, you can’t
1:05:13 get past one unless you fill that out.
1:05:15 Exactly.
1:05:16 Would that suffice where we’re saying this is required.
1:05:18 At least it would create more of an effort of a challenge.
1:05:21 So yes.
1:05:22 Yes, yes, and yes.
1:05:23 Yeah.
1:05:24 Hang on a second.
1:05:25 Are you okay with that?
1:05:26 Yeah.
1:05:27 I mean, as long as it’s, it’s clear.
1:05:28 I mean, I just, I don’t know that it needs to go in the policy,
1:05:31 but I understand because I mean, I’ve already heard of instances
1:05:33 where someone just honestly just for, to get back at somebody,
1:05:38 well, I’m going to pull this book and I’m, you know, just, and ugliness
1:05:41 happens.
1:05:41 So I, yeah, I don’t, it needs to be something.
1:05:43 We can’t judge what they’re citing because they could pull green
1:05:48 eggs and ham and say, this is whatever, but they’d each actually
1:05:51 have to take the effort.
1:05:51 But we can compare it to Florida Statute to make sure.
1:05:53 Right.
1:05:54 But that would have to go to the process because then somebody’s
1:05:57 making, if, if they do cite something, even if it’s utterly
1:06:00 ridiculous, if we don’t allow it to go through the process, then
1:06:03 someone is making that call before it actually gets to the
1:06:05 process.
1:06:05 Yeah.
1:06:06 And we’re, we’re not following the policy.
1:06:07 Yeah.
1:06:08 We will update the form and bring those suggestions to you at
1:06:16 the next two weeks.
1:06:18 Okay.
1:06:19 Ms. Jenkins, did you have anything to say?
1:06:20 No, Mr. Susan, you don’t need to call on me.
1:06:23 Thank you.
1:06:24 Okay.
1:06:25 Um, sounds like you have a consensus on that one.
1:06:28 Next one up to you.
1:06:29 All right.
1:06:30 So this kind of goes back to the informal process when I asked
1:06:33 you, but for a timeline and, and I’m fine with 30 days and I’m
1:06:37 fine with 30 days and we all are up here.
1:06:39 So that was good.
1:06:40 But school board members can vote to fast track any books on the
1:06:44 formal review list and bring them to the top of the list if they
1:06:47 are still on the shelves while waiting for a formal review to be
1:06:50 complete.
1:06:50 So if, if, if something comes straight to the board, uh, we can
1:06:55 say this absolutely needs to go to a formal review.
1:06:58 Uh, if, if, if, if it’s, so we don’t have to take it for the
1:07:03 full 30 days if that’s what an informal process has been taking
1:07:07 or if it, you know, if all five of us look at this and say, yeah,
1:07:12 this, this thing just needs to go to a, a formal process.
1:07:15 We can, uh, we can, we can, we can do that.
1:07:18 Um, so it’s, it’s a fast tracking progress.
1:07:20 I mean, if, if, if a school, if someone came up tonight and said,
1:07:23 here’s this book we found and, and, and this is what it’s saying,
1:07:26 you know, I’m not sure if the right course would be, well, great.
1:07:30 Let’s bring it back to the, the school and they’ll get back to
1:07:34 us within 30 days.
1:07:35 Um, we, we should have the ability at that point to say, yeah,
1:07:39 this, this needs to go right to a, a, a formal review.
1:07:42 So that means it would, we’d fill out the paperwork, it would
1:07:45 get taken off and it would get, again, saving the, the, the
1:07:48 media specialist time and effort.
1:07:50 If it’s something that we say that’s, it needs attention, we
1:07:53 should be able to fast track the process.
1:07:55 I don’t think this one’s necessary because of the way we’re
1:07:58 handled the, what you said before.
1:07:59 Because you, you said right here, if it’s still on the shelves,
1:08:02 because we, you had said in the paragraph before, we keep it on
1:08:04 the shelves if they don’t provide a reason.
1:08:05 Well, it’s going to be on the shelves during the informal
1:08:08 process.
1:08:08 Informal, but you’re talking about formal.
1:08:10 So if we update the form and say, we’re not going to start the
1:08:14 formal process unless you actually put a reason, it, they won’t
1:08:18 be have, they, the formal process won’t have even been initiated.
1:08:21 But do we not start all books on an informal basis?
1:08:26 Yes.
1:08:27 But you’re asking here.
1:08:28 Yes.
1:08:29 School members can vote to fast track any books on the formal
1:08:32 review list and bring them to the top of the list if they’re
1:08:35 still on the shelves, see paragraph above.
1:08:36 The, the, they wouldn’t be on the shelves because I think we
1:08:39 handled it.
1:08:39 You can’t, you can’t just put a frivolous formal request without
1:08:44 a reason.
1:08:44 And I think that’s what you’re saying, why we should fast track
1:08:47 it.
1:08:47 But now we don’t need to do that.
1:08:48 Because if you’re just going to randomly put a book on there,
1:08:51 you know, without a good reason, it’s, um.
1:08:54 That kind of does take care of it, doesn’t it?
1:08:56 Right.
1:08:57 I think, I think that takes care of that for us.
1:08:58 Okay.
1:08:59 We were going to get one way or the other.
1:09:01 So there you go.
1:09:02 We’re getting it.
1:09:05 Thank you.
1:09:06 You good on that one?
1:09:07 Yes.
1:09:08 Everybody else?
1:09:09 Oh, I like the next one.
1:09:10 Good.
1:09:11 Yes.
1:09:12 Okay.
1:09:13 Next up, Mr. Trent.
1:09:14 All right.
1:09:15 Books, uh, used by the book committee members should be the
1:09:17 library books that were removed from the shelves and if needed
1:09:19 to utilize the public library if possible before purchasing new
1:09:22 copies.
1:09:22 This was in, in regards to the previous one where they were
1:09:25 purchasing up to 10 copies of books that we’re going to turn
1:09:28 around and possibly remove from our libraries.
1:09:30 It, again, it’s just a way to save money and since we’re pulling
1:09:34 books in the review process, we have them.
1:09:36 Okay.
1:09:37 Yeah.
1:09:38 I love that.
1:09:39 I mean, that makes sense to me.
1:09:40 You’re good.
1:09:41 Okay.
1:09:42 I’m good with that.
1:09:43 Next one.
1:09:44 All right.
1:09:45 So this is for the book committee.
1:09:46 So somehow, if we can get this accomplished would be great.
1:09:47 Reading cited passages and having an understanding of the entire
1:09:50 work is expected, but reading the book in its entirety is not
1:09:55 necessary if cited passages are clearly in violation of Florida
1:10:02 statute and or items discussed in step two of section E. For
1:10:03 books that remain on the shelf while waiting for a formal review,
1:10:03 several books can be reviewed at one time or at one time.
1:10:03 One review committee.
1:10:04 I’m pretty sure Florida statute cleared that up this last, they
1:10:07 cleared this up, but they not when they came through with the
1:10:10 book review policy that said that you don’t have to read the
1:10:10 entire book in its entirety, you’re allowed to pull just the
1:10:19 passage.
1:10:20 It has to be in context.
1:10:22 Sort of.
1:10:23 So I’m going back to my interpretation of the change we made
1:10:34 last time is when I receive a formal request or Ms. Klein
1:10:40 receives a formal request, we are pulling that book.
1:10:41 And so that’s where I’m unclear.
1:10:50 So typically the informal process begins with actually even an
1:10:56 email, right?
1:10:57 They don’t, they’re asking about a book, they’re asking where it’s
1:11:01 at, they’re asking the status.
1:11:03 I’m assuming when I get that form, assuming it’s completed out,
1:11:07 I’m pulling the book because our new changes, we’re going to
1:11:12 make sure this section is filled out pending review.
1:11:15 Depending on how many books there are, that review may be soon,
1:11:20 that review may be in a long time.
1:11:22 But I believe based on the previous discussion of I get a
1:11:25 completed form, I’m going to notify schools to pull that book.
1:11:28 Right.
1:11:29 So this last sentence for books that remain on the shelf while
1:11:32 waiting for formal review.
1:11:32 So I don’t think there will be books on the shelf waiting for
1:11:35 formal review.
1:11:35 Right.
1:11:36 Is what I’m saying.
1:11:37 You guys asked to remove the books.
1:11:39 You guys asked for the books to be removed.
1:11:42 I have a problem with people not reading the entire book because
1:11:46 statute specifically says body as a whole.
1:11:49 Right.
1:11:50 It talks about taken as a whole.
1:11:52 And listen, I think if it’s in there and it’s descriptive,
1:11:56 sexually, you know, whatever, it doesn’t matter if the whole
1:11:59 rest of the book is fine.
1:12:00 If this one section, page, whatever, yeah, I have a problem with
1:12:04 that.
1:12:04 But I still think they need to, in order to just be above board,
1:12:10 I mean, I don’t like wasting people’s time, but we need to be
1:12:14 honest with the process.
1:12:17 I think what you may be, what we’re trying to get at is that we
1:12:20 can go through it faster if they don’t have to read the whole
1:12:23 entire thing.
1:12:23 They only have to go to the parts that this person said, this is
1:12:26 a problem, this is a problem, this is a problem.
1:12:27 But I don’t know, Paul, that’s a statute thing, the way that’s
1:12:34 worded in statute.
1:12:36 To be harmful to minors, you have to take the whole work into
1:12:39 consideration.
1:12:40 So to qualify under statute as harmful to minors, it’s the work
1:12:46 in its entirety, not cited sections of it.
1:12:49 Right.
1:12:50 I think we’re going to run afoul of our state statute as well as
1:12:54 Supreme Court opinions.
1:12:55 I can’t say that whether or not the district couldn’t say, hey,
1:12:58 we’re just going to remove them anyways, just because we don’t
1:13:01 like this two sentence line on page 35.
1:13:06 I mean, that would be a board decision ultimately, but you will
1:13:11 not be doing it under statute if you’re not doing the
1:13:14 consideration of the work as a whole.
1:13:15 So therefore, you couldn’t say it’s inappropriate for children
1:13:20 or it’s harmful to minors.
1:13:21 Is that something we can look more into?
1:13:24 What he’s saying is if you wanted to define it under those two
1:13:27 terms, that you would have to do it.
1:13:29 But if it was anything else, you could just say.
1:13:31 Legally, to be harmful to minors, it has the test in statute.
1:13:36 That’s your test.
1:13:37 So you can’t say it’s harmful to minors and that’s why we pulled
1:13:42 it off the shelves.
1:13:43 If you’re not going through that review to meet that definition,
1:13:48 it has to be reviewed in its entirety.
1:13:50 So if you wanted to pull it not saying those terms, you can
1:13:54 still pull it and you can still get it done, but it has to
1:13:57 follow.
1:13:57 Right.
1:13:58 State legislature is currently proposing removing the test from
1:14:01 the statute itself.
1:14:02 Right.
1:14:03 So it’s still there.
1:14:06 Hope they get to work on that.
1:14:08 So I’m just on that.
1:14:09 Yeah.
1:14:10 I’m going to ask.
1:14:11 I’m pulling the book.
1:14:12 I’m asking real quick.
1:14:13 Thank you.
1:14:14 What is your direction on this?
1:14:15 I think we…
1:14:16 Can I…
1:14:17 Yes, you can.
1:14:18 Just to jump in here.
1:14:19 I think we’re like this two different mindsets happening.
1:14:22 So prior to this policy being changed, it was taking an
1:14:25 extremely long time to get a book reviewed, right?
1:14:27 But now that the policy is being changed, the books are being
1:14:30 removed immediately.
1:14:31 And so you’re trying to fast track them being reviewed to be
1:14:34 able to be put back into this school with this policy.
1:14:38 So I think it’s just, to me, I, again, I am going to use a
1:14:45 horrible analogy, but if you had a tray of brownies and it had a
1:14:49 little bit of dog poop in it and you couldn’t see it and you
1:14:53 couldn’t smell it and you couldn’t taste it, it’s still in there.
1:14:55 Right?
1:14:56 And so, for me, that’s kind of where I’m at with this on.
1:14:58 I know Ms. Klein’s going, “Oh my gosh.”
1:15:00 No, but I, that’s, I just, to me, I’m like going, “Hey, I don’t
1:15:04 think that it’s appropriate.”
1:15:05 So, again, I think their books don’t remain on the shelf during
1:15:12 the formal review process.
1:15:14 So this is where the sentence is like kind of conflicting.
1:15:16 Exactly.
1:15:17 This is where we’re having a hard time.
1:15:18 Several books can be reviewed at one time or at one book review
1:15:22 committee.
1:15:22 That’s, you’re trying to fast track it.
1:15:24 I understand the need for that.
1:15:25 I guess where I’m kind of at an impasse with this is just the
1:15:31 legislature is going to probably
1:15:34 catch up and this is going to end up being a mute point and we’re
1:15:36 going to have to come
1:15:36 back and make it align with statute here pretty soon anyways.
1:15:40 So, we can be proactive with it and say, “Hey, you don’t have to
1:15:43 read the entire book.
1:15:44 You can read just the passage part of it that’s inappropriate.”
1:15:47 That’s where I’m at.
1:15:48 But I don’t know where the rest of the board is.
1:15:50 Are we able to, I’ll go back to I think what you’re saying, Mr.
1:15:55 Gibbs.
1:15:55 Are we able to say this is, this is what we want in Brevard?
1:15:59 Yeah.
1:16:00 I think the board can approve or not approve books.
1:16:05 Okay.
1:16:06 Are you open for challenge?
1:16:08 I have not reviewed whether or not someone would be able to
1:16:10 challenge that decision.
1:16:11 So, I couldn’t say you would be insulated from a lawsuit saying
1:16:15 you’ve deprived my child
1:16:17 of access to books without good cause because you didn’t find
1:16:20 that they were harmful to minors.
1:16:22 Right.
1:16:23 I would have to do some research on that piece.
1:16:25 But sitting here right now, you don’t have any obligation or
1:16:31 legal obligation to purchase
1:16:32 the books anyways.
1:16:33 The question is, since they’ve been purchased, can you remove
1:16:37 them without it?
1:16:38 And again, I don’t know what the potential for liability would
1:16:42 be on the backside of that.
1:16:43 But you control the materials in your schools.
1:16:47 I think the appropriate thing would just to be say, this is what
1:16:49 we would like to do and
1:16:50 have Paul review it to make sure that it doesn’t violate any of
1:16:53 the laws and it stands up and
1:16:54 then bring it back if it’s possible.
1:16:55 And if it’s not, bring it back and say, here’s why.
1:16:58 Maybe even reach out to Mr. Trent and explain it to him.
1:17:00 Is that okay?
1:17:01 Yeah.
1:17:02 Sound good?
1:17:03 Good.
1:17:04 We had a consensus on that.
1:17:08 Okay.
1:17:09 Thank you.
1:17:10 Wait, wait, wait.
1:17:11 Was it consensus to wait for legal review?
1:17:13 Yep.
1:17:14 That all paragraph?
1:17:15 Okay.
1:17:16 Thank you.
1:17:17 We’re getting to the end of this.
1:17:20 Get it.
1:17:21 Get it, man.
1:17:22 Thank you so much.
1:17:23 The last issue that I’m gonna bring up is the concern that what
1:17:28 we
1:17:28 already have done on the committee and have put some books on
1:17:34 the shelves that
1:17:35 are not appropriate for some of the students in the school, but
1:17:41 others.
1:17:42 For example, a book that’s okay for 10th graders to check out,
1:17:47 but not 9th graders.
1:17:48 That really puts us at risk.
1:17:52 The media specials.
1:17:53 The media specialist to make sure that that book would have to
1:17:57 be guarded then and be close
1:17:58 to them to make sure it doesn’t need to be checked out to be
1:18:01 read by a 9th grader or
1:18:02 an 8th grader or a 7th grader, depending on what, you know, if
1:18:05 you’re a 7 through 12 building.
1:18:07 And you could pick up that book and go sit down and read it.
1:18:10 We’ve already deemed it not appropriate for that.
1:18:13 So two things could happen.
1:18:15 Somehow we have to look back and say which ones we’ve done this
1:18:19 for and if you’re gonna keep
1:18:20 it in the school because I think moving forward it’s gonna be an
1:18:23 in or out situation.
1:18:24 I’m pretty sure this committee is gonna look at it and it’s
1:18:27 appropriate for this building or it’s not.
1:18:29 But some that they’ve already done that to maybe needs to go
1:18:33 back behind the media specialist for them to monitor that.
1:18:38 I know there’s some that are back there already or it gets back
1:18:42 into the review process to if it’s appropriate to be in this
1:18:46 campus or not.
1:18:47 So this was media specialist actually reached out to me to ask
1:18:51 about these books.
1:18:52 So what do we think?
1:18:54 I think we’ve, you know, the state is taking care of some of
1:19:00 this for us because they’ve developed a new training that all
1:19:03 our media specialists are now having to go through.
1:19:05 And the additional responsibilities and the transparency.
1:19:08 We’re putting all the titles online and all of that.
1:19:10 I think when this is always going to be an issue, for example,
1:19:15 even in our elementaries because we have all of our elementaries
1:19:19 going from pre-K to sixth grade.
1:19:20 And I’ll just give you an example.
1:19:22 The Hunger Games is on the shelf in many of our elementary
1:19:25 schools because many of our fifth and sixth graders will read it.
1:19:27 The Hunger Games is not necessarily appropriate for a second
1:19:31 grader.
1:19:31 And you say, oh, they can’t read it.
1:19:32 No, I had a second grader who could read it.
1:19:34 It’s not necessarily appropriate in my mind as a parent for a
1:19:38 second grader.
1:19:38 And I know that many of our, I will give you an example, a media
1:19:41 specialist at my children’s school, when they would do the book
1:19:45 fair, the scholastic book fairs,
1:19:46 they had a sixth grade only table that unless your parents had
1:19:49 given you permission to go and shop those books.
1:19:51 So they’re always going to be, even in our elementary setting
1:19:55 because you’re talking about seven or eight possible grade
1:19:59 levels in a single school, there’s going to be that issue.
1:20:01 Same with our junior seniors.
1:20:03 We’ve got going from seventh to twelfth.
1:20:05 Our media specialists are already managing this in their own way.
1:20:09 In the elementaries, it might be if you’re kindergarten, first
1:20:13 and second grade, you’re over here until you’re ready for the
1:20:15 chapter book section unless you have special permission.
1:20:17 And then they’re keeping an eye on the kids who are starting to
1:20:20 read at the upper levels so that they know what’s appropriate.
1:20:23 Same thing with seventh through twelfth graders.
1:20:25 I don’t know how they’re managing it.
1:20:26 Those media specialists are rock stars because they have to have
1:20:30 that extra set of eyes and really know their collection.
1:20:32 But they really know their collections, especially the great
1:20:36 ones.
1:20:36 They get in there, they get to know them.
1:20:38 They’re more accountable than ever.
1:20:40 So I just hesitate for us to do too much with this because, and
1:20:43 I understand the concern, but because they’re already having to
1:20:47 do it.
1:20:47 And if we get in there and dictate this, that, and the other, we’re
1:20:51 ignoring the fact that they’re already doing it.
1:20:53 And that, you know, I just don’t know that, I think our book,
1:20:58 when our committee makes their decision, and you’ve talked about
1:21:03 this in the last paragraph, they make the decision, they’ve
1:21:06 already made some calls.
1:21:06 This is going to be for this great enough.
1:21:08 I think it’s really actually a lot for them to manage which
1:21:13 grades can check it out.
1:21:14 I mean, it’s, and some of the, for the challenge books,
1:21:16 sometimes it’s easier just to put the ones, you know, to have
1:21:19 the committee say, just put it back the shelf, behind the shelf,
1:21:22 and they can pull that one.
1:21:22 But we can’t put every book that’s only appropriate for high
1:21:26 school behind the shelf at a junior/senior high.
1:21:29 We can’t do that.
1:21:31 They don’t have a big enough section.
1:21:33 You know, it’s just, it’s just not reasonable.
1:21:35 So I think, I don’t, I’m not sure that this is practical to have
1:21:43 that kind of a limit.
1:21:47 May I?
1:21:48 Okay.
1:21:49 Ms. Jenkins?
1:21:50 Yeah.
1:21:51 I don’t know the last time we stepped foot in a library, but
1:21:54 books are categorized by reading level, by type, by genre.
1:21:58 As Ms. Campbell said, our media specialists are well aware, and
1:22:01 this isn’t Walmart.
1:22:02 Kids aren’t self-checking themselves out.
1:22:04 Someone has to physically check them out, click on their face,
1:22:07 click on their name, and scan that book.
1:22:09 So, you know, it’s insane to me.
1:22:12 We’re talking about this like, this is like drugs or weapons
1:22:15 that kids are going to go find on the shelf and go sneak into
1:22:18 the corner and take advantage of.
1:22:19 There are plenty of barriers in place.
1:22:24 If there is a book that’s being questioned or challenged, that
1:22:28 media specialist is going to be well aware of it already in
1:22:31 their, in their library, because they’re the first person who
1:22:33 gets a notice of it.
1:22:33 So they’re not going to hand over a book that’s not appropriate
1:22:36 for a first grader to a first grader.
1:22:38 They’re just not going to.
1:22:39 And right now, they don’t have assistance, and they’re lucky if
1:22:42 they get a volunteer to help them check in and out books inside
1:22:44 of their library.
1:22:45 So they’re more aware than ever before what kids are taking home.
1:22:49 Okay.
1:22:50 Thank you, Ms. Jenkins.
1:22:52 Ms. Wright, would you like to speak on the topic?
1:22:57 Yeah.
1:22:58 Here’s where I’m at with this.
1:23:02 When it comes to erring on the side of caution to protect a
1:23:04 child’s innocence, that’s what we should always do.
1:23:06 The fact that we’re having to argue about these books, some of
1:23:09 the passages that I’ve read are horrific.
1:23:11 They should not be in our school libraries.
1:23:13 If you want to buy that book for your child, by all means, that’s
1:23:16 your right as a parent to do so.
1:23:17 But again, these policies should be very, very clear that we are
1:23:21 going to err on the side of caution, and I think that we’re
1:23:23 getting there with being able to remove them.
1:23:25 I’m never going to be in favor of having a section of the
1:23:29 library that would be a dirty section or a, maybe not safe, for
1:23:34 every kid section.
1:23:35 I just don’t think that’s appropriate at all.
1:23:37 So for me, I’m a little bit extreme in this manner, though, so.
1:23:41 Well, I just, I’m just wondering, what then are you, what are we,
1:23:46 we just need to be super clear what we’re asking for.
1:23:48 Because I hear you, and I don’t necessarily disagree with, but
1:23:51 you didn’t, you didn’t necessarily give direction.
1:23:52 What do you want us to do?
1:23:54 What do you want us to look like?
1:23:55 Because we, if we’re going to change it, we’re going to put in
1:23:57 policy or we’re going to give direction to staff to make a, we
1:23:59 need to tell them what we’re asking for.
1:24:01 Yep.
1:24:02 So Mr. Trent, what is your definition?
1:24:06 I believe going forward, we’re, it’s going to take care of
1:24:10 itself because I do believe they’re going to err on the side of
1:24:14 in or out.
1:24:14 They’re not going to say odd grades can read this and even
1:24:18 grades can’t.
1:24:19 It’s not going to be like that.
1:24:22 That was mentioned about drugs.
1:24:26 I think, I think porn is equally as, as damaging to a young
1:24:31 person’s mind than drugs.
1:24:33 So it is very important to me.
1:24:35 All right.
1:24:36 So, and this was coming from a media specialist that was asking,
1:24:40 what do I do?
1:24:40 And I think in the future, like I said, it’s taken care of.
1:24:44 Now, if there is any book that this book review committee in the
1:24:49 past has said, it’s, it’s good for 10th and above.
1:24:53 I mean, I would really like the error on the side of it needs to
1:24:57 be behind the librarian or the, or the media center center, uh,
1:25:02 media specialist.
1:25:05 It’s very hard to avoid that situation.
1:25:06 Yeah.
1:25:07 We could, I mean, we could, what we haven’t done is prescribed
1:25:12 to the committee what they can and cannot do.
1:25:14 In fact, we came up with that first meeting.
1:25:16 It was get rid of all of them or let it all stay.
1:25:19 And they came up with other, right?
1:25:20 They all voted other if you’ve watched the video.
1:25:22 Yeah.
1:25:23 And the other was that particular book decide this is for 18 and
1:25:27 up because it’s an adult book.
1:25:28 So it’s going to go behind the shelf.
1:25:30 And if you’re not 18, you have to have specific.
1:25:34 Since it’d be in one book, should, should we.
1:25:36 That, that book was separate.
1:25:37 The second book that has been done, there’s only been two, right?
1:25:40 The second book they decided 10th and up.
1:25:42 So it was a problem then if we, if we want to give some more
1:25:46 parameters as to what they can and cannot do to not cause
1:25:48 problems.
1:25:48 I don’t know.
1:25:49 I, I do think some of this is going to, we’ve got to let the
1:25:53 process have a chance to work.
1:25:55 Personally, I’m kind of frustrated that we can’t just move
1:25:58 forward, you know, because right now we are, we do have a policy.
1:26:01 But functionally, we do not have a policy.
1:26:03 No.
1:26:04 Because we keep pulling this one back.
1:26:05 So I, like I said, I think it’s going to work.
1:26:09 And we are going to have, and we have a committee made up of
1:26:14 what it’s going to be now.
1:26:16 But again, I’m just, I, we’re not clear yet.
1:26:19 What do you want?
1:26:20 Make it clear what you want.
1:26:22 Are you saying any book that, in the committee, this is talking
1:26:25 about books that have gone through the committee.
1:26:26 We’re just saying that, then you’re, what you’re asking like,
1:26:29 seems like, is to define for the committee what their options
1:26:33 are.
1:26:33 You can say, we’re not going to have this book in Brevard Public
1:26:37 Schools at all.
1:26:37 Or we can say, it’s going to only be allowed in high schools.
1:26:44 Or, because then, the problem with that is, this one is 10th and
1:26:48 up, but it’s a 9th and up.
1:26:49 What about a junior, senior?
1:26:50 If we say it’s okay for high school, that’s what I said, we can’t
1:26:53 have a section that only 7th and 9th graders can only go to this.
1:26:55 And that’s what we said going forward, it’s going to be a yes or
1:26:58 a no for that.
1:26:58 Right.
1:26:59 So, if we’re, I don’t want to dwell on the past of, if it is
1:27:04 just one or two books, we’ll, I think we’ll just keep it as, if
1:27:10 it’s already there and they’re managing it, so be it.
1:27:13 I don’t, I don’t want it there at all.
1:27:15 And again, it’s not going to be that much of an issue moving
1:27:20 forward.
1:27:20 So, I can, I can, I said I would bring it up.
1:27:23 I can always go back and say, this is, it’s in your library.
1:27:27 We’ll, we’ll deal with it.
1:27:28 Yes, sir.
1:27:29 Just, just to mention, the, the books that we’ve had thus far
1:27:34 have been predominantly high school titles.
1:27:36 And it’s been very clear that they’re not appropriate for
1:27:39 younger grades.
1:27:39 I just want to make sure our policy can withstand a title that’s
1:27:43 perhaps in our elementary grades, where the committee would say
1:27:47 is appropriate for older grades.
1:27:48 And so, just in terms of longevity of the policy, I do think we
1:27:53 have to specifically do that, because we might be looking at a
1:27:57 title that we want to say no to elementary, but okay for high
1:28:01 school.
1:28:01 Right.
1:28:02 So that, that’s my only in the yes, no category.
1:28:05 There is still some gray area.
1:28:08 Just the titles we’ve done so far have just been high, high
1:28:11 school relevant and middle school.
1:28:12 Correct.
1:28:14 Yeah, I, I just, I need to follow up on one thing that was said.
1:28:18 Mr. Tren, I hear that you say porn is equally as damaging as
1:28:24 drugs.
1:28:24 But I want to remind you if there’s porn and pornography, it’s
1:28:29 already against state statute and it wouldn’t even be behind the
1:28:35 shelf.
1:28:36 So the things that we’re talking about have to go through the
1:28:40 committee and be okay with the state statute that already exists.
1:28:43 Great point.
1:28:44 Ms. Jenkins.
1:28:45 Are we all okay with the direction?
1:28:47 Do you feel pretty good with?
1:28:48 Well, I don’t think we clarified the, the elementary versus our
1:28:53 older kids.
1:28:53 We need to.
1:28:54 Oh, I thought he had.
1:28:55 Okay.
1:28:56 I apologize.
1:28:57 My understanding was he was pulling back.
1:28:58 Are you pulling back from this suggestion, Mr. Trent?
1:29:00 Because it sounded like you were.
1:29:01 We were on that.
1:29:02 Okay.
1:29:03 But Ms. or Dr. Sullivan brought up another situation that I
1:29:07 think Ms. Wright is piggybacking on.
1:29:10 Is that it?
1:29:11 Because this wasn’t that ninth grade, 10th grade wasn’t an
1:29:15 elementary high school issue.
1:29:16 Right.
1:29:17 I think she was just saying.
1:29:18 And I have heard from.
1:29:19 If you continue to change it, we’re going to cause a problem.
1:29:21 Right.
1:29:22 I have heard from, because we do need to, it needs to outlive
1:29:26 this board, this situation.
1:29:27 We need to, we have to think forward on all of our policies.
1:29:30 Not that they’re permanent because they can be changed.
1:29:32 But let’s say if we ever developed a K-8.
1:29:35 Right.
1:29:36 You know.
1:29:37 Would it.
1:29:38 I don’t.
1:29:39 I know.
1:29:40 Take a breath.
1:29:41 But it’s not, it’s not, it’s not impossible.
1:29:42 That’s what everybody else does.
1:29:43 You know.
1:29:44 I mean, we, we have to think.
1:29:45 I mean, our, the media specialist of that school is going to
1:29:48 have to manage that situation.
1:29:48 Right.
1:29:49 Can we not have like an elementary leading and learning and then
1:29:52 secondary leading and learning
1:29:52 committee like that?
1:29:53 So they’re separate to some degree, right?
1:29:54 But I’m just saying whatever the committee decides, that book is
1:29:59 still going to be in
1:30:00 the, are, are we saying at a K-8 where a book might be
1:30:03 appropriate for a middle school, middle
1:30:06 schooler, and the committee says it’s fine for middle school,
1:30:09 but it’s not okay for elementary.
1:30:09 What’s a K-8 media specialist?
1:30:11 If you’re going where I think you’re going in that situation, we
1:30:15 put it in policy, then
1:30:16 a media specialist at a K-8 is going to have to just pull the
1:30:19 book and not have it at all.
1:30:21 So I, I think we need to let this, you know, for the one book
1:30:25 that we have, the one book.
1:30:28 Right.
1:30:29 And listen, I know where these came from.
1:30:30 I know who they came from.
1:30:31 Um, and it wasn’t you originally, but I’m just for the one book
1:30:34 we’re talking about where
1:30:35 they said 10 and up.
1:30:36 Everybody knows a parent can still submit a letter to the school
1:30:40 if they know and say,
1:30:41 I don’t want my child to read this book.
1:30:43 They’ll put it in the notes and they can, they can make sure
1:30:46 that doesn’t happen.
1:30:46 No, we’re good.
1:30:47 We need to keep, uh, you know, the L know that that will
1:30:50 continue to happen.
1:30:51 But for that particular book, you know, I think we’re, I think
1:30:54 we’re good there.
1:30:55 So I just to clarify that, cause I want to ask, I’m just, I want
1:31:00 to be clear on this.
1:31:00 So if a book is challenged at the elementary level, it’s pulled
1:31:03 from all schools, period.
1:31:04 Is that what you’re saying to me?
1:31:05 I mean, I think in the policy we need to, we do need to be clear
1:31:09 because there are books
1:31:10 that are going to be appropriate for older kids that may not be
1:31:13 appropriate for elementary learners.
1:31:14 Yeah, I, I’m thinking Ms. Klein and I can work out some form
1:31:19 issues with grade bands.
1:31:20 If the, if the board would like us to work up some solutions
1:31:24 where we have time to think
1:31:25 about how we can address grade bands and in the form that they
1:31:29 submit and potentially a form as the outcome
1:31:32 of the hearing, you know, that everybody would sign that
1:31:36 clusters by grade bands.
1:31:36 If the board would be amenable to that.
1:31:38 I would be in favor of that.
1:31:40 I’d be, anybody else?
1:31:42 Maybe three to be in favor.
1:31:44 Oh, I think.
1:31:45 Yeah.
1:31:46 Definitely.
1:31:47 I would appreciate that work so much.
1:31:48 Thank you guys.
1:31:49 You guys are going to make it.
1:31:50 Yes.
1:31:51 Are you okay now?
1:31:52 Yeah.
1:31:53 We’re going to work on it.
1:31:54 Good.
1:31:56 Okay.
1:31:57 Next up.
1:31:58 So lastly.
1:31:59 I thought he said last on the last one.
1:32:00 I thought I heard him say, I thought I heard him say last thing.
1:32:05 I thought I heard him.
1:32:06 Oh my gosh.
1:32:07 Lastly, I just wanted to be on record to know that it, this is
1:32:11 not a problem.
1:32:11 From the board or you, or even the state that any teacher is
1:32:17 being asked to remove every
1:32:18 book out of their classroom.
1:32:19 Okay.
1:32:20 That is not going on.
1:32:21 So it I’ve, I’ve been fielding phone calls in this county that
1:32:25 they were being asked.
1:32:27 It is not from us or from this district.
1:32:29 I just want to be clear.
1:32:30 So I know we’re being recorded.
1:32:32 And Mr. Trump.
1:32:33 Do you have any questions?
1:32:34 I just want to be clear.
1:32:37 So I know we’re being recorded.
1:32:39 And Mr. Tren, I appreciate that there was a lot of confusion and
1:32:45 fear when this first
1:32:46 started where those communications were going out, but it was in
1:32:50 a sense to protect staff,
1:32:51 not to manage what they were doing.
1:32:54 Because when this law was originally passed, there was no actual
1:32:58 guidance to the districts
1:32:59 and how to enact the law.
1:33:01 And so unfortunately those rumors are still existing out there.
1:33:05 So thank you for clarifying again.
1:33:07 Sure.
1:33:08 And that was recent.
1:33:09 It was over the, in the last week.
1:33:11 So I just want to make sure that wasn’t coming out.
1:33:14 So no, we are not asking for classroom.
1:33:16 I know you’re not.
1:33:17 Yes.
1:33:18 Yeah.
1:33:19 But we are looking at a tool, electronic tool to help our
1:33:25 classroom teachers make their classroom
1:33:28 libraries, um, a online, uh, searchable document.
1:33:33 Oh, very nice.
1:33:34 So we’re looking at that right now.
1:33:36 Thank you.
1:33:38 All right.
1:33:39 Well, thank you very much.
1:33:40 That finishes up board policy 25, 21.
1:33:43 Next topic is athletics.
1:33:45 Um, everybody understands that, uh, Dr. Schiller and I met a
1:33:50 couple months ago, set direction
1:33:51 to put this on a discussion topic.
1:33:54 We met yesterday and last week over this.
1:33:57 And he said, um, that he wants to come forward on the 28th
1:34:00 afterwards and pull it all together.
1:34:01 So we have an opportunity for Mr. Ramjet to present with others
1:34:05 on athletics.
1:34:06 If you guys can please come forward, Mr. Parr.
1:34:09 Hang on just a second.
1:34:10 Mr. Parr and all you guys can take the front rows.
1:34:12 I think Mr. Ramjet, Mrs. Aguirre had your presentation on the
1:34:18 thing.
1:34:18 Can you show them how to do that for them and stuff like that?
1:34:20 So if you guys can come forward, Mr. Ramjet, you should have it
1:34:24 on there.
1:34:24 Um, I, did you see, I see Sean.
1:34:26 Hey guys, how you doing?
1:34:27 Um, if you want, yeah, just hang on just a second.
1:34:30 Um, if you guys will come forward and sit at the tables, these
1:34:33 are the ones with the microphones.
1:34:34 Is that cool?
1:34:35 Mr. Chairman.
1:34:36 Yes, ma’am.
1:34:37 Before we begin, I, I am, um, I know you just talked about the
1:34:43 presentation and all that,
1:34:44 but I am, I have concerns with us having this discussion.
1:34:48 This was brought up, uh, by a board member request at your
1:34:51 request for us to have this discussion.
1:34:52 When we have discussion items as a board, it’s usually a time
1:34:55 for us to start thinking about
1:34:56 and then trying to get some direction to the staff.
1:34:58 Mm-hmm.
1:34:59 You just alluded to it that, that direction was already given to
1:35:02 Dr. Schiller.
1:35:02 Dr. Schiller has had a task force made up of six ADs, I believe.
1:35:05 Human resources, transportation, facilities.
1:35:08 Mm-hmm.
1:35:09 They’ve been meeting and working on it.
1:35:10 They’re working on a presentation, it’s my understanding, on
1:35:14 March 28th.
1:35:14 So I’m not really sure why we are going to have a staff member
1:35:20 present their own presentation
1:35:21 that they’ve been putting together, just so the rest of the
1:35:25 board knows, outside of the task force
1:35:28 that Dr. Schiller has put together, a separate presentation.
1:35:32 I find that to be highly inappropriate and I, I, I see that
1:35:37 guests have been invited.
1:35:39 We’ve had, when we have discussion items, discussion items, we’ve
1:35:44 got people here and, you know,
1:35:45 when we had our meeting in December, we had this conversation
1:35:48 about no surprises.
1:35:49 We’ve had it several times since then.
1:35:51 We should not be walking in as board members now, all of a
1:35:55 sudden, recognizing that we’re
1:35:56 supposed to be having a discussion, but yet there’s an agenda
1:36:00 already set by you with guests
1:36:02 who are coming.
1:36:03 This is, these people are not here at the invitation of the
1:36:06 superintendent.
1:36:07 All, all the board needs to understand that.
1:36:09 I’m not sure where the invitation came out, if it came from you,
1:36:12 if it came from Dr. Ramjet,
1:36:13 but these people, Dr. Schiller, can you confirm that for me?
1:36:17 These people are not here at your invitation.
1:36:19 That is correct.
1:36:20 Okay.
1:36:21 So here we have an interim superintendent that we have brought
1:36:23 in.
1:36:23 So…
1:36:24 No, no offense to the people who have come.
1:36:26 I love the work.
1:36:27 We, we may be presenting fantastic ideas, but I have, when we,
1:36:30 Dr. Schiller has already been
1:36:31 tasked with this.
1:36:32 We brought him in for his excellent experience in so many
1:36:35 districts across the country.
1:36:36 I think what’s about to happen is highly inappropriate.
1:36:40 Okay.
1:36:41 So can I…
1:36:42 And we didn’t let the task force that he’s, and we trust their,
1:36:45 his professionalism,
1:36:45 their professionalism, because I think we’re about to offend the
1:36:48 people who’ve been doing
1:36:49 that great work, which includes six, at least six ADs.
1:36:53 So thank you for that.
1:36:55 At no time did Dr. Schiller ever say that he wanted to bring
1:36:58 forward a presentation with that.
1:36:59 Him and I had had discussions about a month and a half ago about
1:37:02 putting athletics on during
1:37:04 this time.
1:37:05 So what I did was, as I put the athletics on here, and we’re
1:37:09 talking about discussing.
1:37:10 At no point are we making decisions on anything.
1:37:13 We are being appropriately given a presentation, which is what
1:37:17 we have during discussions, and
1:37:18 we’re doing that moving forward.
1:37:19 There’s no issue, there’s no asking you to make decisions based
1:37:23 on anything.
1:37:24 This was something that we discussed before.
1:37:26 Dr. Schiller and I put it on there, and at no time had we before
1:37:30 done this.
1:37:30 I don’t think that…
1:37:31 I think the inappropriate piece is, is that athletics is a
1:37:34 component.
1:37:34 Dr. Schiller is in charge of that from the district.
1:37:37 He’s been part of those meetings that you’ve been meeting, or Dr.
1:37:40 Ramjet is a part of those meetings.
1:37:42 And I had a discussion with Dr. Schiller earlier that said that
1:37:45 this is great.
1:37:45 We’ll move forward.
1:37:46 He can present.
1:37:47 And then Dr. Schiller is going to come back with the finalized
1:37:50 policy recommendations.
1:37:51 And at that point is where we’re moving forward.
1:37:53 So I don’t know where the confusion is at.
1:37:56 I don’t think that’s true.
1:37:58 Dr. Schiller, didn’t we meet today and you said, okay, I’ll come
1:38:00 back on the…
1:38:00 Today.
1:38:01 We did, today.
1:38:02 And to be honest with you, I put this on the agenda per a
1:38:05 conversation.
1:38:06 Dr. Schiller never brought it up until yesterday that he had had
1:38:10 a situation and an issue with it.
1:38:11 So here we had all of these things moving forward.
1:38:13 And I don’t think it’s inappropriate to have the guy that we’d
1:38:16 said that would come forward to do it and then present in front
1:38:19 of us as long as we’re not giving any kind of direction.
1:38:21 And I don’t.
1:38:22 He’s the head of athletics.
1:38:23 He’s been here for two years.
1:38:24 I understand that.
1:38:25 But what’s inappropriate is to have a staff member, an assistant
1:38:29 director, develop and present a plan outside and circumventing
1:38:34 the authority of his supervisor, which is the superintendent.
1:38:40 Developing a plan outside of…
1:38:42 Nobody here is asking for any kind of direction to be given.
1:38:46 The task force.
1:38:47 We are going to be reviewing.
1:38:49 I hope we have the time.
1:38:50 We were recharged with reviewing our policies, our bylaw
1:38:54 policies in the zeros and our policies in the 1000s.
1:38:56 I know that we’ve been, that was what we were tasked for.
1:38:59 There are so many things in those policies that define the role
1:39:03 of the board, the role of the superintendent.
1:39:06 It is not appropriate for a staff member who is a subordinate to
1:39:11 the superintendent to develop a presentation to present to us
1:39:16 outside of the authority of the superintendent who is already
1:39:20 doing the same work and is doing it in collaboration with other
1:39:26 staff members.
1:39:26 And you said that Dr. Schiller told you, did not tell you that
1:39:29 he was, and I actually know that that is not necessarily true.
1:39:32 Dr. Schiller, did you not tell?
1:39:34 Because I asked you how that was going and you said I was
1:39:37 preparing stuff to be ready on March 28th.
1:39:39 So I will say again that I put this on the agenda and as a board
1:39:45 chair, I can call a special meeting.
1:39:46 I can ask for any kind of a topic to come up.
1:39:49 If you remember, we went ahead in mask mandate with a school
1:39:54 board chairman calling a mask mandate meeting on Friday for
1:39:58 Monday to have people present and push a policy.
1:40:00 That is the truth.
1:40:01 No, it was a board majority.
1:40:02 And you have the authority to call it.
1:40:03 So this was not a just circumstantial issue.
1:40:07 This was something that we’ve discussed.
1:40:09 We put on the calendar and I did not know that this was an issue
1:40:13 that he was presenting and all these other things until
1:40:16 yesterday.
1:40:16 And had we done that, we discussed it, it wouldn’t be that big
1:40:19 of a deal.
1:40:19 But when you have the man that’s the head of athletics and you’re
1:40:22 asking him to give a presentation over topics that we should
1:40:25 probably listen to,
1:40:26 and you have Dr. Schiller coming in for a final policy, I don’t
1:40:30 think that there’s a problem with that.
1:40:30 Who asked this person to do the presentation?
1:40:33 I am speaking, Ms. Campbell.
1:40:35 Mr. Susan, you talked over her as well.
1:40:37 I am speaking, Ms. Campbell and Ms. Jenkins.
1:40:40 The issue is that we have an agenda to go through.
1:40:42 You’ve made your points.
1:40:43 We have complete right to have him present and I would like him
1:40:47 to present.
1:40:47 That’s it.
1:40:48 So you directed the assistant?
1:40:50 No.
1:40:51 We met together and we put it on the agenda.
1:40:54 Dr. Schiller, did you ask Dr. Ramditt?
1:40:55 Listen, Ms. Campbell, no.
1:40:56 I need to answer this question.
1:40:57 No.
1:40:58 Because we’re violating policy.
1:40:59 We’re not violating policy.
1:41:00 Dr. Schiller, did you ask Dr. Ramditt to develop this
1:41:03 presentation?
1:41:04 No.
1:41:05 Ford?
1:41:06 Am I allowed to call a meeting?
1:41:09 Yes.
1:41:10 Am I allowed to put something on the agenda?
1:41:12 Yes.
1:41:13 Am I allowed to have somebody present?
1:41:15 Yes.
1:41:16 Are you allowed to go to a staff member and direct them to do
1:41:19 something?
1:41:19 I did not.
1:41:20 I put it on the agenda and asked him a long time ago if he would
1:41:24 be prepared to do it.
1:41:24 He said, sure.
1:41:25 So I put it on there.
1:41:26 So you just, so you asked Dr. Ramditt, you asked an assistant
1:41:29 director to do something.
1:41:30 I, oh my.
1:41:31 Is it okay if they present?
1:41:33 I guess I’m confused.
1:41:34 I’m like, what is happening right now?
1:41:36 I’m not really sure.
1:41:37 This has been on the agenda since the 20th of February.
1:41:40 So I, I assumed we were obviously going to, some kind of
1:41:43 presentation.
1:41:44 But I don’t know what’s going on yet.
1:41:46 Discussion.
1:41:47 So it was put on the agenda by Mr. Seusson in the, in the manner
1:41:51 that we each can by letting
1:41:52 Tammy know, hey, can we put it on for discussion?
1:41:54 This is any other topic we put on for discussion.
1:41:56 It was not put on by Dr. Schiller.
1:41:59 And when we talk about agenda development, the agenda by our bylaws
1:42:04 are supposed to be
1:42:06 developed by the superintendent in conjunction with the chairman.
1:42:11 So there’s two issues.
1:42:12 One is we can put things on for discussion.
1:42:15 We can put things on for discussion all day long.
1:42:17 We can, by submitting that to Tammy, the chair looks at it, the
1:42:21 superintendent, you know,
1:42:21 to have that discussion.
1:42:23 Discussion.
1:42:24 A presentation is different.
1:42:26 And as a board member, we should not be circumventing the
1:42:29 authority of the superintendent to go to
1:42:32 a staff member and ask them to do work.
1:42:35 Hang on a second.
1:42:36 For us.
1:42:37 Especially outside.
1:42:38 That is not our authority to do.
1:42:40 And like I said, again, it is on top of violating our policy.
1:42:45 It is insulting, unprofessional to the task force who is doing
1:42:51 this work in a comprehensive manner.
1:42:53 Facilities, human resources, transportation is my understanding
1:42:56 from the questions that I have asked.
1:42:59 It is very inappropriate for a staff member to be circumventing
1:43:04 that process.
1:43:05 It’s very appropriate for a board member to ask a staff member
1:43:08 to do that.
1:43:08 And again, the superintendent has a plan that’s being worked.
1:43:12 They have met several times because I’ve asked that question.
1:43:15 And they’re preparing a presentation for us to address the
1:43:19 issues in athletics.
1:43:20 Okay.
1:43:21 So, board, I’m just letting you know.
1:43:22 If we continue this, we have potential issues violating our
1:43:27 policy.
1:43:27 And certainly we have already had evidence that a board member
1:43:30 went around the authority
1:43:32 of the superintendent to task a staff member, which we don’t
1:43:36 have direct authority over anyone
1:43:37 but two, as a board as a whole, not an individual, two employees.
1:43:42 And that is the superintendent and the district and our board
1:43:45 attorney.
1:43:45 Okay.
1:43:46 So, many times throughout our careers, we’ve always asked staff
1:43:49 to do something,
1:43:49 whether that’s a request for public information, whether that’s
1:43:52 all these different pieces.
1:43:53 There’s no issue there.
1:43:54 Having something put on the agenda prior to ever knowing that
1:43:59 there was a committee
1:43:59 that was being formed, prior to ever knowing that there was a
1:44:02 meeting on the 28th.
1:44:04 Dr. Schiller, when did I find out about your meeting on the 28th?
1:44:08 It would have been last Friday that this was an issue,
1:44:11 and then you didn’t ask me to officially pull it until yesterday.
1:44:14 Is that correct?
1:44:15 No.
1:44:17 Okay.
1:44:18 Then when is it that you came to me and told me that you had an
1:44:21 issue with this and you wanted me to pull it?
1:44:23 Last week.
1:44:24 No.
1:44:25 One day.
1:44:26 Between 2:00 and 7:30.
1:44:27 That is not–you never asked me to pull the agenda item.
1:44:31 I have put in writing and I’ve told you verbally, sir, my best
1:44:36 advice was that it is not the right time to put the proposal–
1:44:40 Okay.
1:44:41 – or the presentation on and ask you to consider withdrawing.
1:44:44 So here’s what it is, is that we already had the thing on the
1:44:49 agenda.
1:44:50 We’re sitting there for a long time with it on there.
1:44:53 And at no time was this committee that has only been together
1:44:58 for two, maybe three weeks.
1:44:59 And then you have the guy that was actually in charge of
1:45:02 athletics and just ask him to give a presentation.
1:45:05 And then we can discuss and we can move forward and Dr. Schiller
1:45:09 brings it back.
1:45:09 We had a discussion today, Dr. Schiller, where you and I said
1:45:13 that have him present and then you come back on the 28th.
1:45:16 Is that not what we talked about?
1:45:17 That’s partially correct.
1:45:18 Yes.
1:45:19 So I like–so just–I will tell you, there is no issue here
1:45:24 besides a discussion.
1:45:25 There is no board direction besides.
1:45:27 But I could call a special meeting and say, I want to have a
1:45:31 special meeting in athletics and I want to give direction on it.
1:45:33 We mask mandated this thing.
1:45:35 So there’s no–hang on, Ms. Campbell, because you say–hang on,
1:45:39 I am going to go.
1:45:41 The other issue is, is that there is no problem with me calling
1:45:45 a meeting–me calling an item on the agenda.
1:45:47 You spoke to the agenda process.
1:45:49 The agenda process is that Dr. Schiller and staff develop an
1:45:53 agenda.
1:45:53 They bring it forward.
1:45:54 Once it’s published, it’s my agenda.
1:45:56 I can then remove or add any item that I would like.
1:46:00 There is no issue there.
1:46:01 I never sat there and brought this up as a–as a issue.
1:46:06 And we are literally have community people that are here to
1:46:12 present in a non-policy driven nothing just to present on some
1:46:16 of the issues.
1:46:16 And you’re making it as if there’s some kind of major issue here.
1:46:19 And it’s not.
1:46:20 It’s the guy that’s been in charge for the last two years making
1:46:23 a presentation over something that Dr. Schiller and I talked
1:46:26 about.
1:46:26 Schiller and I talked about to set it on the calendar as we met
1:46:31 yesterday to set all of the other topics that we have later on.
1:46:34 So we sat there and said all of these other topics that we had.
1:46:38 I have the whiteboard where it says where we were going to put
1:46:42 the dates in.
1:46:42 So all I did was put it on the agenda per what our discussion
1:46:46 was.
1:46:46 Then when it comes up, it sits there for a week.
1:46:49 There’s nobody on there.
1:46:50 And then I–Dr. Schiller had concerns about something else
1:46:54 rather than the actual presentation.
1:46:55 And then it goes through the whole process.
1:46:58 And then yesterday, for the first time, the 28th is coming.
1:47:01 We’re going to do these different things.
1:47:03 And Dr. Schiller and I met today.
1:47:04 And he said, we can meet today.
1:47:06 And then I’ll come back on 28th.
1:47:08 I was like, okay.
1:47:09 So there’s not–I don’t understand if the board chair is not
1:47:13 allowed to call for a meeting.
1:47:14 I think that it’s inappropriate that we ask some of our leaders
1:47:17 inside the community to come in and speak.
1:47:19 And it’s just for discussion.
1:47:21 And I don’t know where you would have an issue with that.
1:47:24 I’m going to address one thing.
1:47:25 I’d like Dr. Schiller to get a chance to speak more than just a
1:47:29 yes or no answer.
1:47:30 Absolutely.
1:47:31 In our policy, by our bylaws, the chairman can call a meeting.
1:47:36 Mm-hmm.
1:47:37 The chairman or any other board member should not be directing
1:47:43 staff to develop a meeting.
1:47:44 presentation except for the superintendent the superintendent is
1:47:50 already working on a presentation you asked a staff member
1:47:54 outside of the chain
1:47:56 of authority to develop a presentation to invite the guests to
1:48:00 come and speak
1:48:01 to us to do work outside of his authority which is the
1:48:06 superintendent I
1:48:08 am very sorry guys that you are even having to sit in here and
1:48:12 deal with all
1:48:13 of this and it’s nothing against you you know that I love all of
1:48:16 you but this
1:48:18 is about governance this is about governance would you say mr.
1:48:23 Paul and I
1:48:27 appreciate dr. Shiller I have a chance and we may go on and the
1:48:30 board you know if
1:48:31 the board wants to go ahead and hear it and we come back on the
1:48:33 28th again that
1:48:34 will look we’re in this we’re in the superintendent search
1:48:38 process and what
1:48:39 does it look like for the public to realize that a board member
1:48:42 can go around
1:48:42 the superintendent and ask staff to do something outside of
1:48:45 their authority so
1:48:47 dr. Shiller would you I mean where when when you look at your
1:48:52 vast experience
1:48:53 from coming all over the place what is the proper process that
1:48:55 we should be
1:48:55 following let me begin by just circulating to the board a copy
1:49:07 again of the pertinent
1:49:08 policies that govern the role of the board the powers of a board
1:49:14 as defined by Florida
1:49:17 of statutes and your policies and the guidelines that you all
1:49:20 signed and I
1:49:22 would like to show her when I sat today and asked you and talked
1:49:25 to you and you
1:49:25 had no point of order
1:49:29 with your permission I might want to point some of these out we
1:49:36 have gone
1:49:37 through these it might be worthwhile to put everything in
1:49:40 context before I go
1:49:41 specifically into this particular agenda item which was not
1:49:46 generated by me and
1:49:47 the preset and the presentation has not been authorized or
1:49:50 approved for public
1:49:51 consumption by me and until I received a 6:31 a.m. this morning
1:49:58 and reviewed it
1:49:59 with his author at noon until the moment I walked in here I was
1:50:04 told that no one
1:50:06 else has seen this presentation nor has it been time phase but
1:50:11 if I would point out
1:50:12 that you’ve seen this you understand the definitions and the law
1:50:17 under which I am
1:50:18 charged by law and by my employment agreement to operate under
1:50:24 which speaks
1:50:25 about many of the items that are under review here and this is
1:50:29 nothing personal
1:50:30 this is just simply as pointed out I think a very important
1:50:35 threshold point to
1:50:37 clarify and for us to all internalize what our respective roles
1:50:42 and powers and
1:50:43 authorities are and if I might just and I apologize if I’m pedantic
1:50:49 but it speaks to
1:50:50 in the second paragraph the general powers of the board in
1:51:00 number 122 our
1:51:04 determination of educational policies the adoption of such rules
1:51:08 and regulations to
1:51:09 supplement those and it goes on but that goes on to district
1:51:15 organization 1001 this
1:51:19 policy and these are anchored into the Florida statutes this
1:51:22 second paragraph
1:51:24 the superintendent shall be the chief executive officer the
1:51:27 district and shall
1:51:28 define and it goes on but the bottom line is that the
1:51:33 responsibility and the
1:51:35 third paragraph speaks shall flow clearly from the
1:51:37 superintendent through the
1:51:38 administrative staff to the operational personnel and that
1:51:42 excludes the two
1:51:43 board other two board employees of the board council and the
1:51:48 superintendent and it goes
1:51:52 on as you can see but I would draw your attention to 1030 again
1:51:58 anchored in the
1:51:59 Florida statutes on the second page second sentence the
1:52:04 superintendent shall be
1:52:05 directly responsible to board for performance the following
1:52:08 duties and
1:52:08 responsibilities a keep the board informed of school operation
1:52:14 by
1:52:14 preparing board agenda and providing oral and written
1:52:17 communications and so
1:52:18 forth and requesting special board meetings that become
1:52:21 necessary to keep the
1:52:22 board properly informed G speaks to prepare reports to the board
1:52:28 on the
1:52:29 conditions of the school district K to direct and supervise the
1:52:35 work of all the
1:52:36 schools offices employees of the board and they shall be subordinate
1:52:41 to the
1:52:41 superintendent in all matters including those specifically
1:52:45 assigned those rules and
1:52:46 regulations a particular department division official and
1:52:50 assigning the
1:52:50 staff to respective duties evaluating analyzing results of
1:52:55 instructional program and that
1:52:58 is something that we have on the priority list that we need to
1:53:01 bring to the
1:53:02 board right quick delegate authority to the staff in all matters
1:53:06 but still be held
1:53:07 full responsible and just to go on to work session may be called
1:53:13 by the
1:53:13 chairman the superintendent or a majority of board members
1:53:16 solely for the
1:53:17 purpose of exploring matters which you are doing and it moves on
1:53:22 the work what work
1:53:23 sessions are about and something that we have been trying to
1:53:26 instill and I think
1:53:27 with some good success is the board the staff staff to board
1:53:33 communications that are outlined
1:53:37 and I think being that it speaks to the superintendent as your
1:53:43 as the law provides
1:53:44 the chief executive officer and all I’m saying is the fact that
1:53:50 as my calendar
1:53:52 will note that early on at the in January I started with working
1:53:59 very closely with
1:54:00 Miss Hahn on as I would the development of the entire capital
1:54:07 needs program that would
1:54:08 be recommended of which facilities is one such item on February
1:54:16 3rd she provided me with an extensive
1:54:19 cap spreadsheet which we’re going to provide to the board of the
1:54:24 condition and needs of every
1:54:26 school athletic facilities throughout here you know the quality
1:54:30 of the work that she
1:54:31 does I learned about that there was an actual prepared
1:54:37 presentation when I was
1:54:39 directed by the board chair yesterday to contact the assistant
1:54:42 superintendent for
1:54:43 it up to that point in time I had no knowledge whatsoever that
1:54:48 there was a
1:54:48 presentation that was prepared in writing so I did so
1:54:56 I had no knowledge prior to that that a written presentation is
1:55:01 as such that you
1:55:02 that will be presented which has not been presented to anyone
1:55:05 else here nor to
1:55:07 the poor chair about what it is for time phase I sat down today
1:55:16 mr. Brune and I with
1:55:17 the assistant director and reviewed and again in my judgment
1:55:26 had this been brought to me as the work of any more staff
1:55:31 members to be presented
1:55:32 here it would be unacceptable in the first draft and even this
1:55:36 draft it’s not been
1:55:37 time phased it goes probably with questions and answers almost
1:55:41 two hours I think we’ve
1:55:43 allotted 30 minutes to this I I cannot understand we started as
1:55:51 my calendar will show
1:55:53 I had asked Dr. Ramcic to set up a meeting with the 28 athletic
1:55:57 directors which for one hour and 34
1:55:59 minutes I met with at Palm Bay and reviewed every issue it was a
1:56:04 working meeting on the kumbaya I
1:56:06 don’t work that way in order to go through everything that they
1:56:12 felt encompassed the athletics program
1:56:15 ranging from the transportation matters the programs coming all
1:56:19 the way through elementary middle high
1:56:21 school their co curricular matters umpires officials referees
1:56:27 all budgetary fiscal every aspect of human
1:56:33 resources facilities it goes on I then asked and dr. Ramcic and
1:56:38 this and the athletic director since
1:56:41 pulling 28 people out to please identify and select and see if
1:56:46 there be five or six that would serve as a
1:56:48 the core group minutes are kept of every meeting they are
1:56:51 available they’re distributed to all athletic
1:56:56 directors for feedback so everyone is fully informed we have met
1:57:01 already on two occasions there are three
1:57:04 more planned over the next two weeks three weeks I should say
1:57:08 leading up to what had been identified and
1:57:11 placed on the agenda three weeks in advance on the March 28th
1:57:16 workshop session to give to
1:57:18 you much like in the transportation at least the first shot at
1:57:22 the best thinking of the issues we resolved the
1:57:25 issues outstanding and more importantly I recommend it for your
1:57:29 consideration
1:57:30 solutions that come out of the work not only of the athletic
1:57:34 directors but it comes out of the work of
1:57:37 as well as it comes out of each of each of the cabinet members
1:57:41 in their respective areas who have been
1:57:44 part of these meetings to clarify and expand on a hiring HR
1:57:50 matters as an example transportation
1:57:54 miss Hahn is on the process with me to now for her and we’ve
1:58:01 already scheduled the meetings to meet with
1:58:03 all the athletic directors and she as you know will be
1:58:06 personally on site after talking about with them
1:58:09 and going through all their needs this is what my aim was to
1:58:14 bring back the work of this work group like
1:58:16 I did transportation now my intention had been although not
1:58:21 expressed because I’m trying to put this together
1:58:24 along with a lot of other things that mr. Susan and I have
1:58:27 agreed are absolutely critical items which we want to
1:58:30 get to and on behalf of the work of this board which I fully
1:58:33 support as soon as we can put them on the agenda that
1:58:36 that there is background information that was very good to for
1:58:41 everyone to understand about
1:58:43 the numbers of the leagues that were in the number of whatever
1:58:47 all of that but the real hard work piece
1:58:50 with what I hope for you to lay out for you as options and for
1:58:55 solutions integrated with the ongoing plan for the capital
1:59:00 improvement budget and the development of the program side of
1:59:04 our general budget all that fold up how all the pieces will fit
1:59:09 I met with dr. Ransett and again with mr. Brune to try to
1:59:17 look at this presentation that
1:59:21 I come to my attention without any previous information or any
1:59:28 information provided during any of the ad meetings about this to
1:59:33 see
1:59:35 frankly how to go forward today
1:59:37 I’m as anxious to see this presentation that’s presented as
1:59:41 there are a variety of options of what can be done as you are
1:59:45 and so that’s the I’m trying to operate like you’ve I’m required
1:59:51 by law and my employment age contract according to
1:59:54 the laws of the state and policies and it’s how it is in other
2:00:00 districts Florida is a little bit different
2:00:01 just a little bit different than many other states
2:00:05 frankly Florida
2:00:06 provides the superintendent with far more
2:00:10 authority than many states much more and it has the board very
2:00:17 well position to be policy administrative rule directionally
2:00:23 focused
2:00:24 and that’s what I think you know that why I’ve been going
2:00:26 through all the policies systematically why I’ve been stressing
2:00:30 that we do the
2:00:30 philosophy vision goals of this board as well as to have all of
2:00:37 this work through as you go through with your process to
2:00:37 determine who will be your permanent leader so that these
2:00:37 particular matters are not going to in any way way lay
2:00:37 Now will all the issues that we have in so many areas and we’ve
2:00:44 identified many that we need to bring to the board’s attention
2:00:44 and Mr. Susan will be doing that with my full support to the
2:00:44 board and the board has been
2:00:44 and the board has been on the board has been on the board has
2:00:51 been on the board has been on the board.
2:00:51 the board has been on the board has been on the board has been
2:00:57 on the board.
2:00:58 the board has been on the board has been on the board has been
2:01:04 on the board has been on the board has been on the board.
2:01:05 full support because we did this collaboratively of going
2:01:10 forward in our priorities.
2:01:13 This small blip, and that’s what I would call it, is just that.
2:01:18 Miscommunication, perhaps not understanding chain of command
2:01:26 properly, and at the late
2:01:29 hour of the last minute, by seeing this at the first time, I can’t
2:01:34 make lemonade out of
2:01:36 lemons, entirely.
2:01:39 I don’t have sweetener to it.
2:01:40 There’s a way that this could go forward if done properly, but
2:01:45 nevertheless, it is scheduled
2:01:47 as a main presentation as one of the top priorities, and it’s
2:01:51 going to be presented, not by me,
2:01:53 but the workgroup who has put this together.
2:01:57 I serve to provide direction and advice and my background of
2:02:03 having done this for a lot
2:02:06 of years.
2:02:07 These are the people who will make it happen.
2:02:10 If you don’t make all the decisions, because there are a lot of
2:02:12 decisions being made forward,
2:02:13 we’ve set the predicate for your permanent superintendent, and
2:02:17 that is the bottom line of it.
2:02:19 Dr. Schiller, I just wanted to let you know, it has been on the
2:02:23 agenda for a full week that
2:02:25 said that Andrew Ramjet was going to present, I think it’s been
2:02:28 on for two weeks, and when
2:02:29 we met before, you had said, almost a week, possibly longer ago,
2:02:34 you said, “Mr. Susan, I
2:02:36 haven’t seen the presentation,” and I said, “Well, if you can,
2:02:39 reach out to Dr. Ramjet and ask
2:02:41 him.”
2:02:42 Right.
2:02:43 And so this last minute, like this just all of a sudden happened,
2:02:46 you could have reached
2:02:48 out to him and gotten it, that’s okay, but like where I’m at
2:02:51 right now is that we had
2:02:52 agreed earlier this morning that we would move forward with the
2:02:54 presentation and stuff like
2:02:56 that, and at no point did you say that you were going to bring
2:02:59 like board powers and stuff
2:03:00 like that together.
2:03:01 I would have prepared the board powers that allow the chair to
2:03:04 call the meeting to call
2:03:05 for, I mean, I add agenda items all the time.
2:03:09 The issue, the issue is –
2:03:10 How do we move forward?
2:03:11 We move forward in the event that the rest of the – that this
2:03:15 has been on the agenda,
2:03:16 Dr. Schiller said it’s okay to present, we let Schiller – we
2:03:19 let him present, we duly
2:03:20 note what Ms. Campbell’s trying to say, and we move on.
2:03:22 I mean, like this – it’s not an issue, Dr. Schiller has said it,
2:03:26 we just have duly noted
2:03:28 and let’s go.
2:03:29 I mean –
2:03:30 Dr. Schiller, I appreciate you taking the deep dive that you are
2:03:31 taking into the – into
2:03:33 these different departments that we’ve asked, and obviously we
2:03:35 have a lot of athletic directors
2:03:36 that are here that are wanting to speak, and there are people
2:03:39 and our staff, and so again,
2:03:41 how do we honor them and let them have their – we don’t have
2:03:44 time for a two-hour presentation,
2:03:45 I’ll be completely honest on that, we don’t.
2:03:48 We’re never going to get through our policies if we don’t do
2:03:50 that, but at the same time,
2:03:51 I don’t want to say to our people that are, you know, these are
2:03:54 our staff, that we don’t
2:03:55 want to hear what you have to say, because we want to hear what
2:03:57 they have to say, you
2:03:57 know?
2:03:58 So how do we move forward, or can we work together and
2:04:00 collaborate on that?
2:04:02 Dr. Schiller had allotted – said that we had allotted 30
2:04:06 minutes to it, and I think
2:04:07 that – I don’t know if that’s enough.
2:04:09 I think it’s a little bit longer than that, but I think we need
2:04:11 to listen to Andrew Amgett
2:04:13 and move forward.
2:04:14 I mean, like, I think that that’s what we came here to do, it
2:04:16 was on the agenda for almost
2:04:17 two weeks.
2:04:18 It was – I mean – okay.
2:04:20 I think we honor people’s time by following policy and procedure
2:04:27 from the get-go.
2:04:29 That’s how we honor people’s time.
2:04:31 And not only having to have this conversation once again about
2:04:37 the roles and responsibility
2:04:39 of a chairman wasting time, but it’s also a waste of time to ask
2:04:43 a staff member to develop
2:04:44 something that’s already being developed.
2:04:46 And it’s also a waste of time when the board doesn’t get to see
2:04:50 it in advance and review
2:04:51 it, ask questions, have questions prepared.
2:04:53 That’s also a waste of people’s time.
2:04:55 And, Mr. Susan, there was one thing you said that I have to talk
2:04:58 about.
2:04:58 You said, “It’s my agenda.”
2:04:59 No.
2:05:00 It’s the board’s agenda.
2:05:01 Okay.
2:05:02 And we all should be aware of what’s going on it and have – and
2:05:07 have some kind of notice
2:05:07 ahead of time.
2:05:08 Especially with a topic like this, it makes absolutely no sense
2:05:12 why we didn’t have any notice
2:05:13 about it.
2:05:14 And I think it would be duly noted that it sat on there forever.
2:05:17 I’m not done.
2:05:18 It didn’t sit on there forever.
2:05:19 Point of order.
2:05:21 The thing is –
2:05:22 Excuse me.
2:05:23 Do not tell me to stop speaking.
2:05:24 I’m not finished, sir.
2:05:25 I said you stopped speaking, and that’s why I started speaking.
2:05:27 Please.
2:05:29 And you also told our superintendent that he could have reached
2:05:31 out to someone who is subordinate
2:05:33 to him.
2:05:34 That’s not how it works.
2:05:35 Because it’s not my right to do that.
2:05:36 Point of order.
2:05:37 Mr. Susan.
2:05:38 You clearly don’t like criticism.
2:05:43 But unfortunately, we’ve seen you do this time and time again.
2:05:48 It’s a problem.
2:05:52 And it is frustrating that we’re wasting people’s time.
2:05:54 But it is something that’s important to talk about.
2:05:57 Because again, I don’t know if you all realize, we got an email
2:06:01 yesterday saying that we’re going
2:06:02 to need to extend our workshops or have additional workshops
2:06:05 because we have so much to talk about.
2:06:07 But we’re wasting time by not preparing each other with what we’re
2:06:10 going to talk about ahead of time.
2:06:12 Okay.
2:06:13 Are we good to move forward?
2:06:16 Yep.
2:06:17 I don’t know what is even happening right this night.
2:06:20 So Dr. Schiller, clearly you have not – this was not your
2:06:23 presentation.
2:06:24 This is not – this is –
2:06:25 He absolutely said he was big for it.
2:06:26 You’re saying right now that you can’t put your seal of approval
2:06:29 on this.
2:06:29 He agreed to move forward with it.
2:06:31 But Dr. Ramja is your subordinate.
2:06:33 So is it all right with you if knowing all of those parameters,
2:06:37 is it all right with you
2:06:38 if Dr. Ramja, who is your employee, moves forward with the
2:06:42 presentation noting that it is not the official presentation
2:06:46 and it has not been sanctioned by you?
2:06:48 She already agreed to it.
2:06:49 And I never even knew that this was happening.
2:06:51 Go ahead, Dr. Schiller.
2:06:53 I’m not at – I’m not at all happy with this, particularly the
2:07:01 fact that there have been adequate opportunities at the meetings
2:07:04 and others to contribute and to explain to his superior as well
2:07:10 as the other ADs that something was being developed.
2:07:12 Right.
2:07:13 In deference to the fact that there are professionals and
2:07:17 members of the community who have been invited,
2:07:19 whom I’ve never met nor have given their time, I do think it
2:07:24 would be most considerate of the board
2:07:26 that a period of time is allotted so we can all see what is
2:07:33 being done.
2:07:34 Again, I made my statement with regard to process.
2:07:40 And I would just reiterate that the board chair and I are 99.9%
2:07:46 in alignment of direction and virtually everything.
2:07:50 We agreed to disagree for this 1.1% of this piece.
2:07:56 I do not want in any way, shape, or form for this bit of a
2:08:04 disruption or a lack of communication to stop the board’s
2:08:11 progress
2:08:11 and the extent to which of the kind of important work that this
2:08:15 board is doing and will continue to do
2:08:17 and the very difficult decisions it must do.
2:08:20 And I would appreciate that the next time that we have something
2:08:25 that you’re going to bring out pre-printed policies
2:08:27 and everything else that at least say that you’re going to do
2:08:30 that so that I can prepare myself.
2:08:31 So with that, he’s already –
2:08:33 Can I ask a request, please?
2:08:34 They are not part of the discussion.
2:08:36 Can I ask a request, please?
2:08:37 So if we can have you guys come forward –
2:08:38 Can we take a five-minute break to clear the room of awkwardness
2:08:41 and tension for our guests
2:08:42 who are going to come up here and speak, which is already
2:08:44 uncomfortable to begin with?
2:08:45 That’s a good idea.
2:08:46 All right.
2:08:47 We’ll break.
2:08:48 And if you guys can come forward.
2:08:49 Thank you.
3:24:17 thank you.
3:24:47 Thank you.