Updates on the Fight for Quality Public Education in Brevard County, FL

2023-04-25 - School Board Work Session

0:00 Music.

4:56 Thank you.

13:55 That’s a prelude for the board’s discussion as to where we go

13:57 from here.

13:58 So, Sarah Lee, I will turn it over to you.

14:00 All right.

14:01 Thank you very much, Sue.

14:03 It’s a pleasure to be here, board members.

14:05 I’m Sarah Lee Morrissey.

14:07 I am your neighbor.

14:09 I live right up the street in Volusia, so I’m happy to be here

14:14 in person.

14:15 and yes z does follow wxy but not in their company name and so

14:22 with me this afternoon

14:25 is are my colleagues raphael loud and also adam lubinski is also

14:32 with us although i may need

14:36 somebody uh we have to admit there he is all right um okay so

14:48 give me just a second to get this there we go

15:01 and okay all right so based on the direction that ms hahn

15:11 received from you at your march 22nd

15:14 meeting she enlisted the assistance of wxy who is an annual

15:19 planning consultant with you

15:21 and asked uh or authorized uh wxy and myself to proceed to have

15:28 conversations with each of you

15:30 about board redistricting and to also speak with the supervisor

15:35 of elections come forward with our

15:38 findings and hopefully have some discussion today that gives

15:43 further direction on how

15:45 you want to move forward so today’s agenda is relatively short

15:54 and uh as you know that i will go through each of these items

16:00 with you and start off with just

16:04 summarizing that my colleague raphael and i were able to meet or

16:09 rather speak with each of you some by

16:13 phone some by zoom but we were able to have conversation and

16:18 then i was also able to have a conversation

16:22 with brevard supervisor of election mr tim bobonic

16:26 and in each of our conversations with board members we focused a

16:35 series of questions on

16:37 three subject areas each member’s district specific district

16:42 redistricting

16:46 approach criteria and then lastly public engagement

16:51 and um as you might expect because i know you’ve talked about

16:58 this before

16:59 everyone raised different concerns and particularly when we’re

17:05 talking about individual board members

17:08 districts there’s some unique concerns and or characteristics

17:12 of your districts which we heard about and then we we discussed

17:16 different criteria and as you would expect

17:22 different emphasis is placed on different criteria by each board

17:30 member

17:32 so let’s take a few minutes if we can to talk about redistricting

17:37 criteria

17:38 and also included in this table are some engagement options and

17:44 as we move through the presentation we’ll talk a little bit more

17:48 about engagement options and i want to make clear we did not ask

17:54 any board member

17:56 to place a priori to place a priority on criteria what you see

18:00 here in this table is a summary of what we heard

18:04 in speaking to board members in terms of whether a board member

18:09 felt strongly about something

18:11 or perhaps a particular issue was not even raised by a board

18:16 member so you may not see

18:19 uh a sum of five as you go across each of these criteria and

18:24 that would be because perhaps that particular

18:27 criteria was just not brought up in conversation

18:31 um so no surprise to i think any of you there’s not a lot of

18:37 agreement but i am very happy to say we were

18:41 able to find one criteria of which everyone agreed on and that

18:45 is that no one’s ready to move forward with seven

18:48 um seven board members so i took that as a positive sign um

18:54 there was uh also uh not really referenced

18:59 here but when we spoke about to what um every board member uh

19:05 acknowledged and understood that balancing

19:10 overall population is the minimum legal criteria so i would say

19:14 that was a point of agreement as well and then

19:17 um because a lot of work has already been done at the county

19:21 commission

19:22 and you’ve seen in sue’s presentation at your march meeting

19:28 where that deviation fell

19:30 for the county commission which is right hovering at eight and a

19:34 half percent

19:35 that there was some general uh consensus that that that that is

19:41 a reasonable deviation as

19:44 as as you move forward uh and i know that you’ve had um

19:48 discussion uh and direction that it needs to come

19:53 under 10 percent and you’re now over uh 10 percent there were

19:59 some other common threads

20:03 uh as as i think you would expect and some of those have to do

20:08 with the distribution of students and also the number of schools

20:14 across board members districts um diversity within the

20:30 population and how it portrays itself across each of your

20:31 districts

20:31 um obviously there is consensus from a few of you about county

20:45 commission boundaries and uh also some

20:50 discussion about communities in general

20:53 when we move into discussing um public engagement there’s uh a

21:03 some level of uh agreement that

21:09 um the degree to which

21:12 you move forward with something beyond a board meeting where the

21:17 public is invited to speak as

21:19 just part of your normal course of business

21:22 um i would say that to the degree those of you felt public

21:29 engagement was important

21:30 you did not think in person necessarily was necessary

21:36 and that um uh virtual could easily accommodate uh public

21:44 engagement we can talk a little bit more

21:46 about that i think what we need to talk about in a little bit of

21:50 detail

21:50 is the discussion about county commission boundaries

21:56 because that as you all know there are several of you that have

22:00 that do consider that as a strong priority

22:05 however that as a priority does compete or conflict with some of

22:14 the other priorities that we heard about

22:17 so for instance

22:21 moving towards uh school board member districts matching the

22:26 county commission boundaries it does

22:28 exacerbate the the imbalance uh across board member districts

22:35 for number of schools

22:37 so if you’re trying to have a somewhat uh equal distribution or

22:44 equal as close as you can get to equal

22:47 distribution that imbalance does um become greater under county

22:53 commission boundaries right now

22:55 under your your current boundaries you have um the smallest

23:02 number of schools is 15

23:04 in one district and the greater number is is 19 and so the delta

23:10 across all the districts is either one

23:13 two three or four if you move forward with county commission

23:17 boundaries

23:18 that delta is greater and that deviation between the smallest

23:22 and the largest

23:23 is much greater this the smallest district would have 12 schools

23:28 the largest district would have

23:29 21 and that delta across districts is either one five or nine

23:37 necessarily you had mentioned this

23:40 based upon the physical location and address correct not on the

23:44 not on the physical location of students

23:46 that is correct that’s strictly school location so in many of

23:50 our districts regardless of where

23:52 they’re drawn students are in our district that go to another

23:55 school it’s just you’re talking about

23:57 physical difference correct okay uh we did we did uh in terms of

24:01 uh possible criteria

24:05 um both students was mentioned as well as student attendance

24:10 boundaries and i think part of that is

24:14 recognizing that distinction between a school may be in an

24:17 individual board members district however all of

24:21 the children who are within that attendance boundary may or may

24:25 not be in that particular board members district

24:29 thank you and i would i would also uh say that everyone uh

24:34 recognizes that they serve

24:37 everyone in your county um i think the issue of number of

24:44 schools specifically uh comes down to

24:50 when a board member wants to get to know their particular school

24:55 community better closer visit the

24:59 school get to know the faculty the administration the families

25:04 it does become more difficult the larger your

25:08 district is geographically and or the larger number of schools

25:13 that you have to make regular visits

25:17 um in the course of a year

25:19 so one of the other areas where um there is some conflicting uh

25:30 priorities

25:33 between the county commission boundaries is the discussion that

25:37 we had with some board members

25:39 about the number of people impacted in moving forward and and

25:44 that did have some relationship

25:46 to the discussion about public engagement miss sarah lee i would

25:50 i would go back to where it says one

25:52 member remains a board member until 2026 but resides out of the

25:56 district i think the proposal that

25:58 had the county commission seat put district five with that

26:02 district so they would actually have

26:04 a district i’m not sure if you saw that one of your bullet

26:07 points inside the presentation is wrapped

26:09 around a person being outside of their district but in fact it

26:13 drew the district with them in it they would have a district

26:16 uh uh the intention with this statement it was from the map that

26:24 we saw uh the board member currently in district

26:30 three would no longer be in district three if you adopt county

26:35 commission and the board member that

26:38 is in district five would not be in district five if you adopt

26:43 county commission boundaries they would remain

26:46 in district five it would just be that their house is like if

26:50 you draw the county commission straight

26:53 which was the current one then that section of where that

26:57 individual is at would not be inside of

26:59 it but we had already prepared to add that person to that

27:03 district does that make sense no we haven’t prepared

27:05 anything her statement is absolutely accurate miss miss campbell

27:08 miss campbell i i i i we did have a

27:11 presentation that put that piece inside of us i would just i

27:15 would like to give a second no no no we made a

27:18 presentation that included there is a document that came out

27:22 that showed that that’s all i’m referring to that’s all i’m

27:25 referring to

27:25 are you talking about the maps yeah no no no miss hand sorry we

27:29 had a presentation earlier that put where

27:32 we took and carved out so that this all could happen there would

27:37 be a district that miss campbell would

27:39 have that district is it’s not like she doesn’t have a district

27:43 it’s not like she’s just floating out

27:45 there there’s a literal district that she would be representing

27:48 you can’t just hang on just just hang

27:51 on if i understood correctly from mr gibbs memo that miss campbell

27:55 would remain in her district and the

27:58 the boundary adjustment would be timed such that miss campbell

28:01 was not miss campbell remained in her

28:03 district during her term of office that’s what i understood and

28:07 that in order to do that that just

28:09 needed to have a little carve out along there to add her

28:13 neighborhood to it is what it was i think we

28:16 were talking about effective dates of mr gibbs perhaps you can

28:20 just to clarify it’s not a drawing of

28:23 the line that if you adopt the county lines they would be the

28:25 county lines right now it’s just miss

28:27 campbell would get to finish her term with district five and

28:31 then at the conclusion of her term she could

28:34 not run for district five anymore she would have to run for her

28:37 new district and miss jenkins would

28:39 continue to represent district three until her term runs and

28:43 then she would have to run for district four

28:45 so part of the presentation had showed and i had had

28:49 conversations with the supervisor of elections

28:52 that that were miss campbell which i think i’ve heard that both

28:58 miss campbell and miss jenkins have

29:00 mentioned that you guys may not be running again so that’s kind

29:03 of like a moot point

29:04 but the thing is is that um both in that you would take that

29:08 neighborhood draw it into five

29:11 until after that individual was no longer present and then move

29:15 that in that’s in a presentation that

29:16 i have we have we have there has been a presentation that had

29:20 that inside of it well it was not a

29:22 presentation that was ever given to this board in a public

29:24 manner and i will tell you i will tell you

29:26 right now i would be careful at saying something that i know to

29:29 be true miss campbell is that our staff

29:31 presented that piece so that’s okay it’s it may have been a

29:34 while ago when it was but that’s what the

29:36 original presentation was that presentation that statement that

29:40 idea was never presented to this

29:42 board and i you don’t want me to challenge you mr mr susan i’d

29:45 like to finish there’s not been a

29:48 conversation there’s not been a conversation about a carve out

29:52 and about my neighborhood my neighborhood

29:54 because i will tell you my precinct is the second largest precinct

29:59 in the entire in the entire county

30:01 it’s got 12 000 voters in it and if you move my precinct into

30:06 any other precinct you’re not you just

30:08 threw off the whole whole entire percentage nobody said just now

30:12 that you would be that that would be

30:14 the way it is there was another option that gave it to where you

30:17 would have a nobody’s taking an entire

30:19 precinct and moving it into somewhere else your precinct is

30:22 larger than your neighborhood miss

30:24 campbell i would say with this for the presence of it that there

30:28 is an option that makes it to where

30:30 you have a district until you decide not to we’ve already talked

30:33 about that that the possibility legally

30:36 if we do it is legal if we adopt right but that’s not we talked

30:39 about my neighborhood but the the

30:41 statement that she put here is correct no the present you you

30:45 were doubting the veracity of her statement

30:48 which is one board member which would be me remains a board

30:51 member until 2026 but resides out of district

30:54 if we adopt the county commission lines i will for three and a

30:57 half years be residing outside of district

31:00 five regardless of you can’t just move a neighborhood and say

31:03 yes you can for this

31:04 i’m just not going to continue to argue with you yes you can so

31:08 there was two options on the table you

31:10 could do it that way or you could take a neighborhood and carve

31:12 it out and put it there that’s it that’s

31:14 all i wanted to say and that is in documents that we did receive

31:17 because i think that was part of

31:18 the conversation and i had the conversation with the supervisor

31:21 of elections and it is completely

31:23 legal conversation the supervisor i understand that is not what

31:26 he said to me well it what i talked to

31:28 about the supervisor and what you talked to i hope would be two

31:31 separate things but it is legal to do

31:33 and he said that as soon as what the corrective action would be

31:36 she could have that district and then as soon as

31:38 that her she is not going to run or she is no longer on the

31:41 ballot you can readjust it or you can keep

31:44 it the same way it’s not a big deal that’s all okay my turn so i’m

31:48 going to go ahead and back up

31:51 miss campbell’s claims maps in which there was a carve out for

31:55 miss campbell were not presented to

31:58 the board i also find it interesting that there would be a map

32:01 that carves out miss campbell and not

32:03 miss jenkins that doesn’t make any sense um and as well no you

32:08 cannot draw out miss campbell’s

32:12 neighborhood because then you would be causing the problems you

32:14 claim you’re trying to avoid with the

32:16 supervisor of elections you have to carve out the entire precinct

32:19 otherwise you’re going to create new

32:21 problems for the supervisor of elections the point that i was

32:25 told or that was presented to this board

32:28 the reason we wanted to adopt the county commission lines was to

32:32 reduce voter confusion so if we adopt

32:34 the lines but then deviate them slightly we’re not reducing

32:37 voter confusion we’ll still have the same

32:39 exact voter confusion so i think the confusion that you may have

32:44 is is that you and i are up for election

32:48 right so that our districts can align because then we are in the

32:51 same election but miss campbell needed

32:54 that extra time so when i spoke to the supervisor of elections

32:57 he stated that this was an option that’s

32:59 all so i just didn’t want it to be that this is the reason that

33:02 you can’t go this route or anything

33:04 like that so that’s it i’m allowed to say with the conversation

33:07 i had with the supervisor and that’s

33:09 what it is mr susan but i’m i’m not confused i’m not confused at

33:13 all um because it wouldn’t make sense

33:15 why you would carve out one board member and not another i don’t

33:19 want to be carved out i’m not advocating for

33:22 that but the fact that you’re having that conversation is very

33:26 odd so no i’m not confused but it wasn’t

33:28 something that was presented to this board all right miss jenkins

33:31 the floor is you miss sarah lee

33:32 okay thank you um and i think as we move uh towards the end of

33:40 the presentation and we talk about

33:45 possible scopes uh i believe that uh your suggestion mr chair

33:52 comes into play this slide is intended to

33:57 discuss solely an exact adoption of the county commission

34:01 boundaries as they exist today um good point and uh

34:07 what uh potential implications would be and i i just call your

34:13 attention to this map uh that is on this slide

34:18 um you know i think uh you know down here in florida i think

34:23 part of the confusion we run into

34:26 with our constituents is many have not been born and raised in

34:31 florida and in fact have come to us

34:33 us from somewhere else often up north and they are not used to

34:38 having a an autonomous school board and an

34:43 autonomous county council they’re actually used to their town

34:49 their community uh having authority over their

34:54 schools and so i think part of the confusion we all run into

34:58 when we’re speaking with constituents is um

35:02 they they are surprised that the school board is an autonomous

35:09 entity here in florida with its own

35:12 operation and then certainly when they’re looking at a voter id

35:17 card and it says county commission

35:21 district three school board commission district four or whatever

35:26 you know it is a reasonable question

35:28 in their mind why are they not the same if if they’re both the

35:32 whole county why are they not the same

35:35 i will say you are not the only district slash county that does

35:42 not match your school board seats with your

35:45 county commission seats um we did not do a survey of everyone

35:52 but i know just as a matter of my own experience

35:56 working on this issue with with others that they may not have

36:03 matched historically or they may have matched

36:07 historically and they do not now and for whatever reason it’s

36:13 often because the school board um

36:17 reasonably so is concerned about different issues than the

36:22 county commission they may oftentimes work on

36:25 issues together but your first and foremost obligation is to the

36:31 operation of your schools

36:34 and um we all know that our schools come in uh very very helpful

36:40 to the county when there’s storms

36:42 um and that there’s often a lot of other issues we work on

36:46 together but it is not unusual for them

36:52 not to match and or for you to decide to match them and or later

36:57 choose not to

37:01 i think the areas that you can see on this map are the areas

37:06 that would be impacted

37:07 if you decide to go to a straight county commission boundary

37:13 adoption these are the geographic areas

37:16 where people will be impacted in speaking with mr babonic about

37:26 that right now brevard has in excess of

37:30 four hundred and sixty thousand registered voters unfortunately

37:34 we know that not everybody votes

37:36 there’s somewhere in the neighborhood of a hundred thousand

37:40 voters in these different colored areas

37:44 so let’s talk a little bit about our conversation with the

37:53 supervisor of elections and i want to make sure i clarify

37:58 um especially this first and second bullet this first bullet

38:03 this first bullet is actually speaking to

38:05 what if you decide to adopt the county commission boundaries to

38:10 be your school board seats

38:12 if you do that you do reduce the number of ballot types

38:21 you don’t necessarily change the number of ballots because

38:25 whatever your number of voters are each voter has

38:28 to have a ballot but this this bullet is speaking specifically

38:33 to if you choose to adopt county commission

38:36 boundaries if you choose to adopt some other variation and we

38:41 don’t know what that would be

38:45 the number of ballot types may go up probably wouldn’t go down

38:52 may go up a lot may not go up a lot that is

38:56 when this issue of looking at the precincts uh and if moving a

39:01 whole precinct is not possible a precinct may be too large

39:06 um then again in conversation with mr babonic at the very least

39:16 do not uh take any geographic unit that is

39:18 smaller than the census block as determined by the u.s census so

39:24 there’s different issues that are raised

39:28 um depending on uh you know how you decide to look at your

39:35 boundaries uh certainly if if we

39:39 become engaged with you to move this forward in uh uh whatever

39:46 manner is decided we would be working

39:49 closely with the supervisor of election on whatever um scenarios

39:56 were created because uh it is important

40:00 to try and keep things as um as as simple as possible whether we’re

40:08 looking at the shapes of the

40:10 the districts or whether we’re looking at um where people are

40:15 voting and the formation of precincts um

40:19 the supervisor of election is required to send out voter cards

40:25 after you adopt um whatever you choose to

40:29 adopt he will have to send out new voter cards to any voter that

40:34 is affected so meaning

40:38 if if if a current voter stays in district one and his or her um

40:44 nothing is changed that particular

40:48 voter does not need a card but if a voter is reassigned to a

40:53 different uh district then

40:55 that voter would have to get a card um and again um he they

41:00 their office uh they have some good staff

41:07 uh they review their precincts and their data regularly uh and

41:11 certainly if we were part of your team

41:13 moving forward we would be continuing to have conversation and

41:18 work with mr babonic and his staff

41:21 lastly before we uh move into some conversation about potential

41:27 scopes

41:28 um wanted to just talk about public engagement

41:33 and uh many of you said an extensive process is not necessary

41:40 but again some competing priorities

41:42 you know if we’re going to impact a lot of people then the need

41:47 for engagement becomes greater

41:48 if

41:50 what form that engagement takes recognizing this work is going

41:58 to happen quickly

41:59 and over the summer so being able to reach out to people through

42:05 their schools is not necessarily

42:07 an option um and people will be away as people normally are

42:13 during the summer we did speak with each of you

42:18 uh about a web tool that wxy has used in other redistricting

42:24 exercises not specifically school board

42:27 redistricting but i know you’re very familiar with attendance

42:31 boundaries and that web tool is able to

42:36 um be made accessible um virtually for people to comment on and

42:42 or um to conduct some virtual meetings so

42:47 um again the whole discussion about public engagement the level

42:52 to which uh any one of you were interested in it

42:57 kind of corresponded to other concerns that um you may or may

43:02 not have have raised

43:03 at this point i am going to turn the next two slides over to

43:13 adam and raphael to talk to you about

43:18 potential scopes uh should you decide that you want to do

43:23 something beyond

43:24 just adopting county commission boundaries

43:28 thank you thoroughly so we’ve put together two scope options

43:37 based on what we heard

43:41 the both scopes recommended analysis of the county commission

43:46 boundaries and a first scenario which

43:51 explores the minimum number of changes to your existing school

43:55 board boundaries

43:56 that you might need to make in order relations and that would be

44:01 to minimally balance the

44:02 populations to get under that 10 percent threshold

44:08 the analysis of the county commission boundaries would be purely

44:13 to calculate the same set of metrics

44:15 that we’d be calculating

44:16 for the county commission boundaries so that in effect you’d be

44:22 able to compare apples to apples

44:25 the county commission boundaries against the scenario one

44:28 boundaries

44:29 under option two we recommend exploring a second scenario

44:37 and this is really a much more open-ended scenario where we

44:40 could explore different member priorities

44:43 and make more significant boundary changes

44:47 and so if you’re interested in this that’s uh we haven’t

44:52 prescribed or recommended an approach

44:54 for the second scenario but that would be determined based on on

44:58 additional board input

45:01 in both scenarios we recommend a board workshop and a round of

45:07 boundary edits following the board workshop

45:10 and that would lead to a final set of scenario boundary

45:17 recommendations

45:18 we recommend different levels of engagement under the two scopes

45:24 in both scopes we recommend

45:27 an interactive mapping tool however only in option two are we

45:33 recommending

45:34 virtual meetings based on your and then both options include

45:42 reporting and that’s just

45:43 a final report as well as a summary of the engagement the

45:47 engagement summary would be different in the two options so in

45:52 the first option it would just be

45:54 a set of metrics who submitted a survey on the interactive tool

46:00 who put a comment on the map what was the web traffic like

46:04 under option two it would include all of that website data in

46:08 addition to data collected at the meetings

46:13 because option one is less work overall the fee is lower and the

46:19 timeline is shorter

46:20 and so we believe that rounding out the analysis by the end of june

46:27 would be appropriate leaving plenty of time

46:31 ahead of august 22nd which as i understand is the latest

46:35 possible date that boundaries can be adopted to go into

46:40 effect um for the next election option in terms of timeline we

46:48 think that it’s a reasonable to complete

46:50 all of the option two tasks by the end of july this summer with

46:56 the same um note later than date

46:59 and then the fee amounts are are different and based at the

47:02 bottom there i want to note that um these are just

47:06 two sets of options we’ve put together we can sort of mix and

47:10 match uh tasks as necessary if the board is interested

47:14 and can provide updated the estimates uh based on these

47:20 different configurations by approved

47:31 um so just quickly touching on the timeline again before kicking

47:36 it off to q a um so we recommend

47:39 under both options to complete the redistricting analysis in may

47:43 the board workshop would then take

47:46 place at one of the listed dates the round of modifications if

47:52 needed would take place after that board workshop

47:58 we’re recommending that engagement take place in june and or july

48:02 depending on the amount of the engagement

48:04 done under other or um how the board would want to proceed on

48:09 engagement we’re recommending that the

48:14 initial scenario is published to the web tool for public comment

48:18 so that the board would then have access

48:21 to public comments as they’re at their board workshop following

48:28 the board workshop workshop in the round of edits

48:31 that revised scenario if the scenario is revised would then be

48:36 re-uploaded to the web tool

48:38 and members of the public would be able to leave comments um on

48:42 that updated scenario

48:47 and under option two in the time we would uh additionally be

48:51 conducting virtual meetings

48:53 and then finally the final redistricting and engagement memo

48:58 once the redistricting

48:59 and engagement tests are complete thank you i’ll pass it back to

49:03 sarah lee

49:07 that concludes the information that we’ve put together for your

49:11 consideration and um obviously

49:14 if if you need any elaboration or answering any questions uh

49:22 during your discussion we’re we’re here

49:29 um thank you i think um you guys did a great presentations thank

49:32 you so much for that um uh with

49:34 that are there any board members that wish to discuss any of

49:38 this i i do know that one of the

49:40 things that would help with whether we went with the county

49:43 commission or not i spent a lot of time

49:45 looking at our current ones and the county commission ones and

49:49 if you do it by population

49:52 um there’s schools like mcnair saturn gulfview that are physical

49:55 locations in one but the majority of

49:57 students may be in the other so you may be able to say in order

50:01 to equal it out you can take those

50:03 schools and regardless of if we went with the county commission

50:06 or not the population inhibits

50:08 you to do that like for me there’s a lot of kids that are in my

50:12 district that go to anderson but

50:14 i think that it’s in your district right so it’s there’s like

50:17 that whole dynamic right so there’s

50:20 the way to levelize all of the schools is in some cases and i

50:23 went across and it’s probably three or

50:25 four that we would have to do that on but the majority of them

50:28 would fall into the districts that

50:30 we have currently um i just wanted to kind of mention that as we

50:33 were moving forward but you guys

50:35 want to start the conversations any kind of the direction or

50:38 anything like that i’ll start the

50:40 conversation so this is um redistricting is obviously one of

50:43 those topics that people feel differently and

50:46 different passions about this because it impacts us all

50:48 differently uh and it’s one of those challenging

50:50 things that we have to to take on because statute says that we

50:55 have to do this um one of the other

50:57 things to take into consideration which i hope maybe our

50:59 legislators will look at this in the future

51:01 but uh our districts based on the number of voters doesn’t

51:04 necessarily correlate to the number of

51:06 students so when you have a retirement community that’s in a

51:08 district now that number goes up and

51:10 so i understand the complexity of this this is it’s a

51:12 complicated issue um to me i’ve said this

51:15 since day one i really feel like adopting the county commissions

51:18 is the same we should keep it the

51:20 same just for simplicity of voters that’s what i’ve said since

51:24 day one i understand it poses challenges

51:26 to really three of you guys i don’t think well no actually

51:28 everyone except for mine mine’s the only

51:30 district i think that doesn’t really get impacted by this uh

51:33 change too much so that’s where i stand on

51:35 this i don’t know where you guys stand on this but i guess that’s

51:37 what we will discuss at this point

51:39 don’t everybody i’ll jump at once all right um yeah i i think it’s

51:53 uh uh well thank you very much for

51:55 doing what you did taking the time and uh how to wrap that up to

51:59 say that we all are independently

52:02 thinking about this um you said that nicely same here i’ve said

52:07 it from the very beginning um don’t

52:11 want to reinvent the wheel there are going to be positives and

52:14 negatives we can sit here for for many

52:16 many months coming up with uh scenarios and you know a couple

52:21 years from now i don’t think we’re going to

52:23 look back and say i wish we would have did the boundaries in a

52:29 different way i mean when we’re

52:32 all off the board it’ll just be new people and uh regardless of

52:36 where we live so i’m with megan on

52:39 this i i’m just i just i’m just i don’t want to spend any any of

52:43 the district’s money if we don’t have to

52:46 and you know i’m all for the uh the county commission boundaries

52:50 they’ve already taken the time and the

52:52 effort and spent the money so that’s where i’ve been since day

52:56 one as well thank you mr truant miss jenkins

53:00 so you’re right um it’s not about the board members individually

53:06 because they aren’t permanent

53:08 but it is about our students our staff and the communities in

53:13 which we represent

53:15 and adopting the county commission map doesn’t make that a

53:20 priority uh it’s clear it’s evident when

53:24 one district will have 21 schools seven of which are secondary

53:28 schools and another district would be

53:30 left with 12. um that’s not in the best interest of students and

53:36 staff

53:39 i have the least amount of um personal buy-in for this

53:45 conversation because whether or not we adopt

53:49 the county commission or completely redraw this map the

53:51 likelihood of me staying in district three is

53:53 basically impossible so my perspective is completely unselfish i

53:58 believe it’s our role and responsibility to

54:00 do what’s best for our students our staff and the communities

54:03 that we serve

54:03 what i’ve found interesting from day one of this conversation is

54:16 that we forget the part where

54:18 the county commissioners had the opportunity and the authority

54:23 to draw the maps in which we’re looking

54:25 at right now and so essentially by adopting their maps you’re

54:29 relinquishing your control and your

54:32 responsibility and authority that you were given by the voters

54:34 who voted you in to make that decision

54:36 i’m not comfortable with that either their role and

54:40 responsibility is very different than ours the

54:42 reason they drew their maps was for their own purposes and their

54:46 roles in representing the counties

54:47 and the areas that they were voted into so that makes no sense

54:52 to me

54:54 personally i think that if we’re going to redraw the map it

54:58 needs to have significant changes to it

55:00 districts three four and five are way larger than one and two

55:04 districts four and five are proposed to continue to grow

55:08 there’s no reason

55:10 to not look at this completely differently again

55:13 an unselfish conversation because i will very much be drawn out

55:17 of my district

55:19 um i think disenfranchising a hundred thousand voters to not be

55:23 able to vote in the next election that they were expecting to

55:26 vote in

55:26 is unfortunate

55:30 um i think

55:32 i’m just going to tell it like it is i think having a

55:35 conversation in the beginning of this

55:37 where we talk about cutting in one board member and not another

55:41 just shows where your priorities lie

55:47 if you adopt those county commission maps i i hope you expect to

55:50 have a very packed room of angry people

55:53 because that’s what’s going to happen because you’re not

55:57 representing the constituents within the

56:00 within the entire county i think it’s a self-serving decision i’m

56:04 completely against it

56:07 again i have no personal buy-in quite frankly i would love to be

56:10 in another district to vote against

56:12 somebody i think this is just i think this is foolish i think we’re

56:16 relinquishing our role

56:18 and responsibility and i don’t think we’re doing what’s in the

56:20 best interest of our students and our staff

56:24 thank you ms jenkins ms campbell sure i’ve got a couple

56:27 questions before i make my comments um i have

56:32 on the slide i guess it’s the last slide with the information

56:38 there was a and on the timeline there

56:40 was mention of adopting the resolution no later than august 22nd

56:44 is there i know in my conversation with

56:48 you i i’d shared my personal feelings is i want to go ahead and

56:51 get this done by the simer for potential

56:53 candidates just out of fairness because that gives them exactly

56:55 one year before their election so i

56:57 don’t know if that was what the thought because i don’t think we’re

56:59 i think our actual statutory

57:00 limitations are this calendar year odd odd year is that that’s

57:05 correct right okay so it’s not

57:07 necessarily the adoption of the resolution by august 22nd it’s

57:11 not necessarily a mandate it’s just a

57:14 a goal correct okay just want to make sure um and then i you

57:20 know so just sharing different thoughts

57:24 you said something about um within the conversation with mr babanik

57:28 about the new voter cards i don’t

57:31 know about the rest of the board members but i get a new voter

57:32 registration card every single year

57:34 regardless of anything changes or not they just send them out

57:37 fresh and new every year and i cut it out

57:39 put it in my wallet throw the other one away um it’s just

57:42 something that they have done routinely unless

57:44 they’re making a change i think they do it all the time i also

57:48 wonder i personally my preference

57:50 between the two options would be option one um i you know it it

57:55 is

57:55 17 000 difference but it is 17 000 and i think that we could you

58:05 know looking at it gets the job done the

58:08 things that it doesn’t do is the sig more significant boundary

58:11 changes i disagree

58:11 miss jenkins respectfully with the making bigger changes because

58:15 i my priority is for us to make

58:17 as few changes as possible and i’ll go on with that in just a

58:21 minute and then i i like i like that we

58:23 have interactive interactive mapping tool but i think what we

58:25 miss in having the virtual meetings i think

58:27 that is something we could do in-house if we had to maybe not

58:29 with the same level of expertise but we could

58:32 facilitate something like that if we you know if we were in a

58:34 tight um so i i will be quite honest with

58:42 you guys it the only there’s only one board member because we

58:45 had this conversation two years ago that

58:46 it was absolutely clear that from day one that this was his

58:49 position because he’s been very clear from day

58:52 one but i’ll be honest i have yet to hear a really solid reason

58:56 for making this drastic change this is a

58:58 drastic change the people the only people who i’ve ever heard

59:02 complain and you know i’ve just been

59:04 on the board for four and a half years ran two campaigns the

59:08 only people who i ever hear complain

59:10 about us not being aligned are people from breck and you know

59:14 for people who are actively campaigning

59:16 because most of the people that’s the brevard republican

59:19 executive committee for those who are not aware

59:21 or political terminology and not even all of them and when they’ve

59:25 said why can’t it be it would be

59:27 easier for campaigning it would be easier but that’s not our

59:29 goal is to make it easier for campaigning

59:31 um our i don’t you know even if we have different goals i don’t

59:35 think that i haven’t heard that

59:37 spoken as any of our goals and when i have shared with them what

59:41 it would mean as far as

59:42 the number of voters who would not get to vote in the next

59:45 election who thought they were going to

59:46 being 42 000 it wasn’t 100 000 it was that’s a total number of

59:50 disruption but it’s only 42 000 that would

59:52 not get to vote in the next election um who were supposed to and

59:57 other if we had not made any changes

59:59 that that makes a difference to them and it makes a difference

1:00:03 to me and i i do have a problem i mean

1:00:06 i know mr gibbs i’m going to trust him i know he’s shared us

1:00:09 with that you know that we can do we can

1:00:12 draw the lines and draw the lines with me outside the district

1:00:15 five i still don’t like it it’s not

1:00:17 about me running again i still don’t like the idea of

1:00:20 representing people and i certainly my one of my

1:00:23 things that i have said from day one is to make the is to not um

1:00:28 create any new precincts to move make

1:00:31 the changes we move precinct by precinct if at all possible i

1:00:34 think that’s what they’ve suggested that we

1:00:36 could do don’t want to have to create new precincts split new pranks

1:00:40 precincts put some put them together

1:00:41 and when i had my conversation with mr bobanic he uh with those

1:00:44 the things we talked about and by the

1:00:46 way he said i i thank you guys for reaching out to him he said

1:00:49 he’d be willing to come and talk to us

1:00:52 as well so we can clear up conversation you had with him and she

1:00:55 had with him and i had with him so we

1:00:57 are all on the same page and and clearly having this

1:00:59 conversation regardless of what we decide to do

1:01:01 um you know one of us said something about reinventing the wheel

1:01:08 exactly i don’t want us to reinvent the

1:01:11 wheel changing our school board boundaries to match the county

1:01:14 commissioners we are reinventing this wheel

1:01:17 we are recreating we are making major drastic changes and i just

1:01:22 if i say about the same thing

1:01:24 multiple ways i’m sorry i on you know and i apologize if

1:01:26 sometimes when we get on this issue i

1:01:29 i seem like a little bit of a tasmanian devil on the inside i am

1:01:31 feeling a little tasmanian devil

1:01:33 because i’ve to me we’re making huge changes with something that

1:01:37 is very close

1:01:41 to being how it needs to be we have really great population when

1:01:46 we have the conversation i very

1:01:48 much appreciated it when we have these conversations and the

1:01:51 priorities i you know it was asked of me

1:01:53 by annalee you know you know what do you think about your

1:01:56 community i’m like you know what when

1:01:57 i look at my community and the community of every district i see

1:02:01 that balanced population i see in every

1:02:04 district a some areas of affluence and some areas of poverty

1:02:10 some title ones

1:02:11 schools and some non-title one areas i see you know just the the

1:02:16 difference you know we have a

1:02:19 really great balance right now and so making minimal changes to

1:02:22 that leaves us with that good balance and

1:02:24 won’t create those districts that have a larger population of

1:02:28 people who don’t have families people

1:02:30 don’t have kids um and so we’re and that that affects your

1:02:35 voting population you know and all of that so

1:02:40 and i also don’t think we’re not talking about many many months

1:02:42 i mean unless you’re you we’re not

1:02:45 ready to make this decision today so regardless i mean if if the

1:02:48 majority of the board kind of sounds

1:02:50 like we’re going there have already made up their mind then you

1:02:53 could put it on the ballot at the

1:02:54 next board meeting and let’s just say we’re doing it we’re

1:02:57 adopting the kind of commission lines so we

1:02:59 won’t spend even 57 000 we won’t do we don’t need to do public

1:03:03 engagement public engagement is if they

1:03:05 want to sign for public comment they can do that if y’all are

1:03:07 ready to do that then roll and we’ll we’ll do it but i

1:03:10 i i don’t but even if we don’t do that even we walk through this

1:03:13 process we’re not talking about

1:03:15 many months we’re talking about today is april 25th we’re

1:03:17 talking about less than four right at four

1:03:20 months of a process and could be even faster if we do the option

1:03:24 one and we’re done by june and then

1:03:26 we get it rolled we do adopt the resolution by july i mean it

1:03:29 doesn’t have to which so we’re talking about

1:03:31 three months there’s no reason you know to say that it’s many

1:03:35 months and this adopting the county commission

1:03:38 lines i’m going to say again it’s not the simplest option it’s

1:03:41 not 42 000 people i’m going to say it

1:03:45 one more time 42 000 people who were who are in district three

1:03:50 or four who would be moved out of

1:03:52 district three or four and we’re going to have some we can’t do

1:03:54 this without moving some people

1:03:56 but i would prefer a plan we’re removing a little precinct here

1:03:59 a little precinct there to make us even to

1:04:01 make us within the in the percentages but then we’ve only moved

1:04:06 a couple of thousand people

1:04:08 out of the next election we can’t avoid it all and i will commit

1:04:14 to you if we’ll go through this

1:04:16 process i’m not going to cherry pick which precinct and say no i

1:04:18 really want that precinct no i really

1:04:20 want no i i’m willing to be fair about it but i think we need to

1:04:25 keep this to me simple is

1:04:27 just do what the county commission did moved one precinct two

1:04:30 precinct we can’t get away with one

1:04:32 because the ways ours are drawn but move one or two three at max

1:04:37 just do the the what we can do to get it even

1:04:41 but to disrupt as few voters as possible to disrupt the balance

1:04:45 that we currently have

1:04:47 of to me really well demographically defined districts i hope

1:04:53 that you all took advantage i

1:04:55 asked tammy to look up the last two rounds and i hope you guys

1:04:57 took advantage of that and read through

1:04:59 those notes because what i saw even down to 2001 um

1:05:02 unfortunately the minutes stopped in october but

1:05:04 where they stopped in october was they were working with the

1:05:07 county commission to redraw the lines and

1:05:08 in october they said we’re not doing that anymore and i had a

1:05:11 conversation with janice kershaw who was

1:05:13 in my seat at the time and she didn’t really remember a lot of

1:05:16 details of it but they for them it came

1:05:17 down to schools and then if you look at 2011 they considered it

1:05:21 again they considered could we could

1:05:24 we go with the county commission lines and they didn’t they

1:05:26 actually made really pretty good size

1:05:28 changes um because they were like 34 percentage points out of

1:05:33 compliance um so we’re definitely not

1:05:37 sitting there so they made some pretty big changes and had a lot

1:05:39 of community feedback um but you know

1:05:42 again they got it done without going even though the option was

1:05:45 available to them of matching the

1:05:47 county commission lines go back and read through the minutes and

1:05:50 um you’ll see they they chose not

1:05:52 to do that and again it part of it is the different purposes

1:05:56 that we have we don’t really all have

1:05:59 to touch the beach we don’t really all have to touch the indian

1:06:02 river lagoon because we don’t take we

1:06:04 don’t those aren’t our kind of issues thank you miss campbell um

1:06:10 i proposed this two years ago

1:06:12 unselfishly we were in a situation where the county commission

1:06:16 had reached out and asked during that

1:06:19 time are you guys going to get moving on your redistricting okay

1:06:22 and what ended up happening is is

1:06:24 that we were in a situation where our i brought it up and said

1:06:28 there’s two options here we can do an

1:06:30 accelerated redistricting just along the same number of times

1:06:34 that you just had spoken to

1:06:35 but the main thing was is if we just mirrored the county

1:06:38 commission this thing could be fixed

1:06:40 so we were out of compliance at that time mr bubonic had been

1:06:43 sending emails over to us asking us

1:06:45 to redistrict because of the situation that he had he was he had

1:06:49 expressed his discontent with our

1:06:51 district because of the behavior of us not responding to him and

1:06:54 not going back so what i had proposed was an

1:06:58 unselfish two years ago let’s move forward with something and

1:07:01 this board decided not to um that

1:07:05 meant that for the next two years we were out of compliance the

1:07:09 next thing is is that i hear over

1:07:11 and over again this thing that we can’t support students because

1:07:14 the physical location of the

1:07:16 school is not in our in our screen statutory law says that we

1:07:20 have to follow all students to be represented

1:07:24 not just where the location of the school is at so when i sit

1:07:28 there and i drive around and i knock on

1:07:31 doors and it’s in rockledge and the students go to anderson and

1:07:35 the same confusion which i will tell you

1:07:37 many people along the campaign trail along the times that i’m

1:07:42 knocking on doors do say to me how is it and

1:07:45 the reason is is that my district i think is the most impacted

1:07:48 so i have i think every single county

1:07:51 difference of county commission in my district so the bottom

1:07:54 line is is that when i’m knocking on doors

1:07:56 i see it a lot where people say well i thought i was in school

1:07:59 board district four or district three

1:08:01 because of what i have for the county commission the other thing

1:08:04 that i would say is is that our schools

1:08:08 we have representation i already i already went through it you

1:08:11 can move mcnair saturn gulfview

1:08:14 over to district one you can move sable croton over to district

1:08:17 three there’s all kinds of options

1:08:19 where the majority of students are inside another district where

1:08:21 the physical location of the school

1:08:23 is in another so if it’s the schools which is not even by

1:08:25 statute that we’re supposed to do it that way

1:08:28 is the can is the part then doing it that way evens it out and

1:08:31 we can get to a more equal

1:08:33 position doing that to say that we’re going to sit here and draw

1:08:36 the districts based on the physical

1:08:38 location of the schools is impossible because the bottom line is

1:08:42 is that gene has mr trent has so

1:08:44 many i have many it would be literally work over work over work

1:08:48 to try to get there so we’re going to

1:08:50 have to go to a place where we just literally sit back and say

1:08:52 okay the majority students here or some

1:08:55 of the students there and we just equal it out and i will tell

1:08:58 you that we can represent a school

1:09:00 because not because the physical location is inside of our

1:09:02 district but the actual students are there

1:09:04 and just the simple fact that i’ve seen all of you go around and

1:09:07 actually represent many of the other

1:09:09 schools in many different ways in a positive thing so i have i

1:09:12 have the belief that you guys can do that

1:09:14 going on to cleaning up the districts there seems to be this

1:09:18 precincts there seems to be this thing

1:09:21 where mr bobonic is saying one thing look he has come forward

1:09:26 and said if i asked you guys two years

1:09:29 to go to do this there’s emails that were sent you didn’t do it

1:09:32 no matter what you do we’re going

1:09:33 to have to impact people so whether we do it with the county

1:09:36 commission or we do it minimally or we

1:09:38 do it like miss jenkins said majorly those people are going to

1:09:41 be represented he’s going to have to

1:09:43 send out the cards that’s just what’s going to happen and it was

1:09:45 part of the presentation over here

1:09:46 so we’re going to impact people no matter what so the argument

1:09:49 isn’t that we’re not going to impact

1:09:51 people it’s just maybe we impact less people if we go the other

1:09:55 way so the other component is is that

1:09:59 this increased costs at a time where we’re trying to reallocate

1:10:02 towards different priorities we’re

1:10:04 also going to be increasing staff time because if we go with the

1:10:07 county commission then the staff time

1:10:09 gets sent up and i mean there’s no doubt that we have currently

1:10:13 policies that we can’t even get to

1:10:16 right now that are out of compliance we have a new

1:10:18 superintendent coming we have a new super strategic

1:10:21 plan coming we have a huge amount of um situation where we’re

1:10:25 going to be going through the budget

1:10:27 which all of those meetings that she had put down on there are

1:10:29 going to be allocated towards the budget

1:10:31 we’ve only gone through two thousand out of the nine thousand we

1:10:34 have literally so much stuff to do

1:10:36 that this is going to impact it so from a cost perspective from

1:10:39 staff’s times perspective from the

1:10:41 impact inside the community from i i would say that this is the

1:10:45 best case scenario i would also want to

1:10:48 make the argument that there are many counties across the state

1:10:53 that have this that match the county

1:10:56 commissions there are many that don’t that is a moot point and

1:10:59 where we draw our lines does not make a

1:11:02 difference of if we represent kids i have many schools that i

1:11:05 represent the kids that aren’t inside my

1:11:07 district so anyways with that i think that there’s a majority

1:11:11 that move towards that i would like to

1:11:13 have a second round of discussion please if you wouldn’t mind

1:11:15 miss miss campbell then please when we

1:11:18 come to the two thousand um proposals don’t try to say we don’t

1:11:22 have enough time for the the rest of the

1:11:25 board meeting mr susan i just like there’s three people that

1:11:29 have given yeah but there are three

1:11:31 people meeting no no miss miss jenkins miss jenkins i don’t like

1:11:37 to be dismissed by any side nobody does

1:11:41 nobody does but i i rather than wrap it up tight because you’ve

1:11:44 got it wrapped up with a bow you get

1:11:46 to go around first round we can have a second round we’re not

1:11:48 done yet we’re not done yet because you brought

1:11:52 up some new issues and you addressed some of the issues that i’ve

1:11:54 addressed or other people have

1:11:56 addressed but you haven’t addressed all of them you brought

1:11:57 something up new and talked about two

1:11:59 years ago so i would like to share two years ago which will be

1:12:01 in the minutes it will be on the video

1:12:03 with the conversations that we had yes we had the opportunity to

1:12:06 two years ago to have this

1:12:07 conversation it was presented by miss hand at the last board

1:12:11 meeting that the census data did not

1:12:13 come out until late the county commissioners got a late start

1:12:17 with their very long process and what i

1:12:19 recall you asking us to do was to say absolutely what you said

1:12:22 let’s just go along with whatever

1:12:24 the county commissioners do but at that point it was going to be

1:12:28 going along blindly because they

1:12:30 were in the process they didn’t know what they were doing they

1:12:32 did not vote on what they were going to

1:12:35 do until november and i as a board member who was on the board

1:12:38 with you at the time was not willing to

1:12:40 say yes to whatever the county commissioners do not knowing what

1:12:44 they’re going to do i was not willing

1:12:45 to do that and by the time we had the decision that they had

1:12:49 made in november we had from november to

1:12:52 december with a christmas break and a thanksgiving break in

1:12:55 there to make to go through this process

1:12:57 and to see and to do our own process which does not have to be

1:13:01 as long and complicated but then we were

1:13:03 short on time and we couldn’t and we couldn’t control that and i

1:13:07 was not i’m not going to blindly

1:13:08 say yes to what another entity is going to do not having any

1:13:11 idea how it’s going to affect us i’m

1:13:13 not going to say yes ahead of time and write them a blank check

1:13:16 for a decision that is our job to make

1:13:19 so i’m just going to clarify that yes you brought it up and you’ve

1:13:21 said that many many times you brought

1:13:23 it up we’re out of compliance we were out of compliance this

1:13:26 much they were out of compliance that much

1:13:28 they got their job done but we did not have time and our general

1:13:32 counsel told us at the time we were

1:13:34 close enough to deal with it and we would push it off to 2023

1:13:38 because that was the next opportunity that

1:13:40 we had we’ve talked about cost increases i hear you i hear you

1:13:44 but we’re talking about 57 000 so

1:13:48 unless you’ve got another cost increase because the supervisor

1:13:50 of elections in cabin conversation

1:13:52 with our consultants has explained it is not an increased cost

1:13:55 to them unless we do something like

1:13:57 create new precincts they have to print all the same things so

1:14:00 we’re not talking about extra increase

1:14:02 and when you talk about too much work to do i hear you mr seusson

1:14:06 i am tired i’m exhausted and i know

1:14:08 i’m looking at the next few months and i know we’ve got so much

1:14:10 work to do and i am committed to do it

1:14:12 and i’ll get up early and stay up late and do whatever i have to

1:14:16 do to get it done but i’m not going to

1:14:17 dismiss this as an issue that’s not as important because we can

1:14:21 just so quickly and glibly take care of it i

1:14:25 i am i am opposed to this i believe there are people when they

1:14:30 realize who who they are that

1:14:32 will be affected will be opposed to this and i hope they speak

1:14:35 up if this is what happens i will once

1:14:38 the decision is made go along and the schools yes i would like

1:14:41 to have an even number schools i hear you

1:14:43 we can be creative and yes we represent all schools and i think

1:14:46 i have done a pretty good job of that

1:14:48 myself too but we’re talking that you have not answered to me

1:14:52 the big issue of the number of voters

1:14:55 who we’re shoving out of an election you have not addressed that

1:15:04 so so first and foremost mr bobanek wasn’t the supervisor of

1:15:15 elections two years ago just want

1:15:17 to make sure that that is clear i also spoke with him and it

1:15:21 appears that my conversation was very

1:15:24 similar to miss campbell’s and again when i specifically asked

1:15:28 him how would this make things

1:15:30 easier for the supervisor of elections he said well it’s

1:15:34 possible that we might be able to reduce the

1:15:36 number of precincts but i don’t know how many precincts would

1:15:39 even be impacted i don’t even know if we’ve

1:15:42 got that response yet it may be the most minimal number he doesn’t

1:15:46 know he said that very transparently

1:15:49 he also told me that you had articulated that one board member

1:15:57 would be displaced so if we’re

1:15:59 going to have this conversation let’s be transparent from the

1:16:02 get-go from the get-go have some integrity

1:16:05 we know where you’re coming from i understand the intention

1:16:09 one thing that’s really important for the community to realize

1:16:13 that we have not discussed publicly

1:16:15 is mr gibbs did send us a memo that said sure we can reside out

1:16:21 of our districts

1:16:23 but that opens us up to a financial liability of constituents suing

1:16:29 the school board for the two

1:16:31 members being out of their area so mr gibbs because i’m sure

1:16:35 that’ll be magically refuted for accuracy

1:16:38 can you please speak to that yeah i had mentioned that there is

1:16:42 a possibility that someone could try

1:16:44 and challenge a board member being out of their district the law

1:16:47 is pretty clear that uh the

1:16:49 board member would get to serve out their elected term so we

1:16:52 would have to defend the lawsuit so there

1:16:55 would be a financial impact to the district should someone sue

1:16:58 the district but i i’m not overly

1:17:00 concerned with the result of that lawsuit right so the law is

1:17:04 very clear but that doesn’t stop in a

1:17:08 politically divisive environment from constituents doing that in

1:17:12 which you will then take on the burden

1:17:14 and cost of that lawsuit just want to make that clear to the

1:17:18 public that’s your taxpayer money that

1:17:21 we’re risking um you know there was conversations about uh the

1:17:25 schools don’t matter we could represent

1:17:28 them all yada yada yada but county commission lines also don’t

1:17:33 take into effect attendance boundaries

1:17:36 either so i mean that’s not a thing nobody nobody’s talking

1:17:39 about trying to get the voters and the

1:17:41 students to live within your area that also go to the school

1:17:44 that’s that’s like virtually impossible

1:17:46 what it means is to have a balance of schools in which those

1:17:48 staff and parents and communities can reach

1:17:52 out to and establish an easy consistent connection with that’s

1:17:56 all that that means it doesn’t have

1:17:58 to do with the voters literally living inside of your district

1:18:01 and i think that’s a really reasonable

1:18:03 concept and request i think that’s what you’re going to hear

1:18:06 from the people who are potentially going

1:18:08 to be displaced by a decision of adopting the county commission

1:18:11 lines

1:18:13 the increase of staff time no that’s the point of hiring

1:18:18 potentially an outside consultant agency

1:18:22 miss hand when she met with us individually i would assume she

1:18:26 had the same conversation with

1:18:27 everyone not just with me requested and recommended that it go

1:18:32 outside of the district to not increase

1:18:34 staff time so that that shouldn’t be a concern at all um and

1:18:39 again the increase of cost this is a drop in

1:18:42 the in the bucket of our budget this is the responsibility that

1:18:46 we have statutorily to

1:18:47 our constituents and the taxpayers who fund our budget and again

1:18:51 if you have someone bring a lawsuit

1:18:54 to those two districts you’re going to eat that cost instantly

1:18:58 all right thank you miss han i think you have a majority of

1:19:05 individuals that want to move forward

1:19:06 with the county commission seats so with that what would you

1:19:09 like us to do sir the the only question i have

1:19:11 remaining is um i was contemplating a public engagement process

1:19:15 similar to what we did with the

1:19:17 attendance boundaries where we have a qr code and access on the

1:19:20 website to a google document where

1:19:21 people can comment and then we would provide that to the board

1:19:24 at the time of adoption um looking

1:19:26 at either may 30th or june 13th do you have a preference so we

1:19:32 make the action you can you would bring it forward on may 30th

1:19:37 yes i think i think may 30th would be the correct time

1:19:41 and the issue that we have is is that we’re going to be let’s

1:19:45 talk about how that communication goes out you

1:19:48 know what i mean so i just wanted to get a chance to speak back

1:19:51 for one second in regards to some of

1:19:53 the things that were said so um miss campbell one of the things

1:19:55 and i guess i haven’t clearly conveyed

1:19:57 this um the reason that i like the county commissioners plan so

1:20:00 much is that there is room for variance for

1:20:03 growth it gets us well below that 10 mark that we’re supposed to

1:20:06 be at it’s 8.5 but i mean it gets us below it so there is room

1:20:10 for growth with it

1:20:11 um and i don’t know i guess i didn’t act accurately convey that

1:20:15 to you um one of the other things i

1:20:17 guess that was said was in regards to the amount of voters which

1:20:19 you you took care of that it’s not

1:20:21 a hundred thousand voters it’s 40 something thousand voters that

1:20:24 it potentially impacts but again of

1:20:26 those voters um i would love to see all 40 000 of them vote in

1:20:30 an election but but they don’t um that’s

1:20:32 the reality when it comes to things that are you know school

1:20:34 board related usually um so again this to me i think

1:20:38 it makes the most sense but i understand why you guys feel

1:20:41 differently about it um i’m just telling

1:20:43 you that’s where i’m at with it all right thank you very much

1:20:49 next work session is on board policy 3500

1:20:55 remote work yes sir thank you the board had asked us to

1:20:59 accelerate that and uh miss green has done so

1:21:03 and uh if you have some any comments or uh questions about tell

1:21:08 you how excited i am about this this is a

1:21:10 argument in my private side that we fight all the time and i don’t

1:21:13 like it there but i really like

1:21:15 it here this is so we believe it’s going to be good for the

1:21:18 district as well so yeah

1:21:22 thank you do you need a microphone she does yeah i think mr

1:21:25 broom is coming up just up aside and let

1:21:27 uh doctor oh got it thank you mr susan miss hand board um at the

1:21:32 request of the board we have a

1:21:35 fast track our remote work policy this particular policy is not

1:21:39 required by any florida statute but by

1:21:43 um the availability and the things we’re able to do now in the

1:21:46 remote world we have had a pilot over

1:21:49 the last year that has been implemented um in our educational

1:21:53 technology department and uh the the pilot

1:22:00 this is a policy that um they have been working on for a year so

1:22:04 we have a little bit of background and

1:22:07 and work behind us and in this policy you find the forms that

1:22:11 are required the approval processes that

1:22:14 are required and the eligibility list for the non-bargaining

1:22:17 personnel that are eligible for the remote work

1:22:21 it follows the neola templates and the administrative procedures

1:22:27 are brevard’s implementation processes

1:22:31 thank you miss green is there anybody that wishes to speak on

1:22:34 this topic

1:22:35 yeah i just i want to say thank you um i think you probably were

1:22:41 in the room when i was having

1:22:43 these conversations over and over again about how important i

1:22:46 think this is for us to

1:22:49 modify and change the way we look at some of our positions here

1:22:54 at bps in order to keep up with the

1:22:56 ever-growing changing environment in the industry around us that

1:23:01 is pulling our staff members and

1:23:03 making it more and more difficult for us to recruit and retain

1:23:06 our staff members so thank you for

1:23:08 working on this so quickly i appreciate it thank you um thank

1:23:12 you dr green i just wanted to make one

1:23:17 request because i didn’t see this job description specifically

1:23:20 down at the bottom you had a list

1:23:22 of the employees who are or are not eligible can you please make

1:23:25 sure the administrative assistant to

1:23:27 the board is included in those who are eligible it was a new

1:23:31 list was uploaded this morning we had missed

1:23:34 some people in the mostly vacant positions and so we have

1:23:37 cleaned that up and she was the first one who noticed

1:23:40 that’s it she’s looking for her name so all right i think she

1:23:43 uploaded that this morning awesome thank you

1:23:46 oh i see it right there it’s number two yeah it’s right there uh

1:23:52 mr trent

1:23:53 now again i just think it’s catching up the times and thank you

1:23:59 for the work

1:24:02 i hope we use this as a marketing tool because i think this will

1:24:04 actually attract some people to

1:24:06 our district that that will look at this and say hey a remote

1:24:08 opportunity to work is something that

1:24:09 they’re interested in so i’m excited about this mr cheatham is

1:24:12 just waiting for that yeah it is like

1:24:15 yes so they’re cheering us on so we’re excited about this thank

1:24:17 you so much i think i uh sentiment of

1:24:20 the board members uh it was specifically losing people in

1:24:24 interviews because other companies are going

1:24:27 remote and there’s a couple people that are pretty high up in

1:24:29 our organization that we’re going to

1:24:31 possibly go to another place because it based upon this so i i’m

1:24:34 really proud moving forward i thank

1:24:36 the pilot group i thank all of your work miss green i think that

1:24:39 this is a great thing so thank you very

1:24:41 much i think we’re all in positive support so move forth and do

1:24:45 great things right um next session

1:24:47 work session is board policy 5511 dressing and grooming yes sir

1:24:54 um mr gibbs had sent some

1:24:57 additional information out to board members some survey results

1:25:00 as requested by the board i think

1:25:01 we’re ready to discuss that uh dr brebley was not able to be

1:25:04 here with us today but we’ll do our best

1:25:06 to try to respond to questions if dr cody uh would mind joining

1:25:10 us at the table i think the um everybody’s

1:25:14 aware and maybe the public’s not that there was a survey that

1:25:16 went out to our students and it came back

1:25:18 with a lot of responses i think that that was a great idea um uh

1:25:21 in the process of doing this i think my

1:25:24 concern has always been that we’re able to do this ahead of the

1:25:27 the next year and it’s been indicated

1:25:28 from staff that we definitely can take this in like we should

1:25:31 and move forward i think even though the

1:25:34 students are not part of our policy or our voter group they are

1:25:38 our voter group like so are they’re

1:25:40 part of our demographics and we should listen to them as much as

1:25:43 possible so um great idea i open the

1:25:47 floor for conversation miss jenkins do you want to go first do

1:25:50 you are you guys presenting anything or

1:25:54 i mean i think i don’t think we’re prepared to present anything

1:25:57 in dr webley’s absence that’s what

1:25:58 a thought you have some comments we’ll follow up i feel like we

1:26:00 had a healthy conversation last time

1:26:02 i think it’s yep yep miss campbell um okay mr trent no i just

1:26:08 want to hear what they have to say

1:26:10 we’re good mr jenkins i i i i’m sorry i was gonna i would just

1:26:17 like to say that we have a lot of

1:26:20 responses that we got and these came in yesterday afternoon i

1:26:23 think around 5 p.m um so uh in all

1:26:27 trends yeah and transparency here i have not had the chance to

1:26:30 process through 150 pages of comments

1:26:33 that we have in this this uh spreadsheet here so i i want to

1:26:38 hear what the students have to say because

1:26:40 this is going to directly impact them and so i think we talked

1:26:43 about this a little bit last time on the

1:26:44 fact that maybe we should move this one more meeting out just to

1:26:47 give adequate time to go through

1:26:49 everything and make sure we’re getting this right mr gibbs that

1:26:51 will still keep us on the same timeline in

1:26:54 order to we’ll push it we’ll have to re-advertise and push it

1:26:57 but we can move it to the work have this

1:26:59 work session and on may 9th it’ll go public hearing may 30th for

1:27:04 final approval june i think 11th and

1:27:07 that would still be well before school starts yeah and dr webley

1:27:09 confirmed that that would still be

1:27:10 time to incorporate those changes into the code of conduct which

1:27:14 is right now out for revisions so

1:27:16 this month they’re working on those or through may they’re

1:27:19 working on those revisions those revisions

1:27:21 are due i believe may 1st right chris hey somewhere around there

1:27:25 okay so we had a conversation sorry

1:27:28 you’re good you had a conversation we just had a conversation

1:27:31 about printing and i actually i think

1:27:33 maybe i was a little out of date that we don’t actually print

1:27:36 the dress code in the planners we

1:27:38 it’s all virtual digital dr webley said they print on request so

1:27:42 if there’s somebody that wants them and

1:27:44 they might print like a so many to put in their front office so

1:27:48 you can write them well and the truth

1:27:50 is i thought about it the dress code is different at many

1:27:52 schools so um uh because they can have tighter

1:27:55 if the uniforms whatever no i’m in agreement i think we need to

1:27:59 spend the our due diligence looking over

1:28:01 these uh this data and uh look at some more red lines and i know

1:28:05 i’ve had some more community feedback

1:28:07 too and talked to some principals too and so i i’m in favor of

1:28:10 moving it off one more i think um if i

1:28:15 can be correct on this you would even though the component of

1:28:18 this we do need to have some sort of a policy

1:28:21 ready for the next board meeting so that we um what i think the

1:28:25 proper process would be for us to review

1:28:27 these and then set an individual meeting with either miss hand

1:28:30 or miss cody and say these are the things

1:28:32 that we’re seeing and then you bring back to that meeting the

1:28:35 next is that about the correct process

1:28:38 you’re thinking you could do it that way i know in the packet

1:28:40 that i sent yesterday student services

1:28:43 and dr webley provided me a red line uh that they tried to

1:28:46 incorporate a lot of the changes into it so

1:28:49 you can look at that as well and say you agree or you don’t

1:28:52 agree with it when you meet with staff

1:28:53 and that would be fun if everybody’s okay with that kind of a

1:28:56 direction you know what i mean i think

1:28:58 that that’s pretty good because i’m reading and i want the

1:29:01 public to understand that there’s this

1:29:04 conception out there that the students are advocating for like

1:29:08 less dress code and it’s and if you read

1:29:10 some of these there are some of those but there’s completely the

1:29:13 opposite where many of our students

1:29:14 are actually saying stop this from going on and i was i was the

1:29:18 i mean you look at number one i mean

1:29:20 it’s pretty it’s pretty good so um i think that there’s a good

1:29:24 uh response from our students and

1:29:26 if that’s okay with the direction i think that that would be the

1:29:29 best thing just understand board members

1:29:30 that when this thing gets published in you know what i mean in

1:29:33 seven days or whenever for the next one

1:29:35 before march or may 9th that if there’s any changes that need to

1:29:38 be made we need to get it ahead of the

1:29:39 the actual meeting so that it’s it’s in there and i think there’s

1:29:42 going to be some more meetings added

1:29:45 so it might have a shorter window when you go to notice because

1:29:48 of the extra meetings that are being

1:29:50 noticed anyway so it’s not a it’s not going to hurt us by

1:29:52 waiting an entire meeting anyway when i advertise

1:29:55 it this week it’s going to be on that schedule so yeah i have to

1:29:58 advertise it for those dates yep and

1:30:00 we’ll have those days probably you’re going to advertise it for

1:30:03 a workshop on may 9th or you’re going to

1:30:04 advertise yeah this this is the board’s opportunity to make

1:30:07 changes so this meeting will now move

1:30:09 to may 9th and then the first public hearing will be may 30th so

1:30:13 that’s where if you make

1:30:14 changes at that we’re re-advertising and kicking it off again so

1:30:18 okay so wait so we normally have

1:30:20 like a workshop like this that’ll be may 9th right and you can

1:30:23 make changes if we don’t make changes

1:30:25 if you don’t make changes there on may 30th you cannot make

1:30:28 changes otherwise we start over again

1:30:30 right our next workshop we need to be prepared to write changes

1:30:32 that we want to see in the policy

1:30:34 and then if it goes through that policy when’s the final date

1:30:36 that it gets approved the first one in

1:30:38 june would be the public hearing number two which will give us

1:30:41 enough time because the other thing

1:30:42 is we’re not just printing something that we’re handing to

1:30:44 people we also have to educate staff we

1:30:46 have to create all the other pieces that that takes a little bit

1:30:49 of time so i think the direction’s

1:30:50 great i like some of these uh these responses and so if you guys

1:30:54 are okay does anybody else have any

1:30:55 comments on this one we got some funny responses we have

1:30:58 somebody who’s advocating for clown shoes

1:31:01 listen listen i i think these are these are kind of funny yeah

1:31:05 all right thank you everybody

1:31:07 doing pretty good on this one um with nothing else the next

1:31:09 topic is conscious discipline discussion

1:31:12 yes sir mrs wright had asked for board discussion on this item

1:31:18 and we have just provided some

1:31:19 information as to where we are with the program uh happy to

1:31:29 answer any questions that you may have

1:31:36 all right uh the main reason i wanted to bring this up was uh at

1:31:41 the last board meeting you know i

1:31:43 brought up the question about conscious discipline and the cost

1:31:45 that we were going to incur to put 225 of

1:31:48 our educators through conscious discipline training and felt

1:31:51 that we could possibly look at taking that

1:31:54 those funds and using that for a different type of training so i’m

1:31:59 glad that staff has put together

1:32:02 something that now looks like we currently have purchased

1:32:05 conscious discipline it’s something that’s not

1:32:08 incurring any additional cost for the schools that are currently

1:32:10 participating in it is that correct

1:32:13 i believe we had uh four or five sessions towards like the last

1:32:18 couple of weeks that were scheduled but

1:32:20 that’s the only thing that we have that we have that we’ll need

1:32:22 to pay for okay um in regards to the

1:32:26 funds that were allocated those uh i thought it was 225 000 but

1:32:31 this is now i do have a question in

1:32:34 regards to this last uh page four of this presentation so it’s

1:32:37 saying that the funds that were allocated are now

1:32:40 have been reallocated to different how does that happen just out

1:32:44 of curiosity because i thought

1:32:46 that would come before us so in our federal programs the board

1:32:50 annually looks at our federal program sort

1:32:52 of scope of work typically that’s done in june july august kind

1:32:56 of time frame and then if there’s an

1:32:58 amendment those amendments are approved by the superintendent so

1:33:01 the board looks at the the overall program under the

1:33:04 information agenda so there there’s not actual board approval of

1:33:09 the title one two three four um title

1:33:13 nine programs so you but you do see it for any comments and

1:33:17 perspective and then as they are amended

1:33:20 through the course of the year those are amended through the

1:33:23 superintendent’s office

1:33:26 okay um i guess my question still still it remains a little bit

1:33:32 on because we were it was presented

1:33:35 before us to approve the 225 000 for the conscious discipline

1:33:39 and so i again you know i got several

1:33:41 emails what do you plan on doing with this what do you plan on

1:33:43 doing with this and uh so again looking

1:33:45 at different training programs that are out there so we still

1:33:48 need to look at different training programs

1:33:51 that are out there there are other sources of funding including

1:33:54 this one that can be available for

1:33:56 those other sources of funding this particular funding was a rollover

1:34:00 uh rollover from the previous

1:34:02 year so we needed to get it expended by august so that’s why we

1:34:05 we put it in as an amendment to get that done

1:34:08 okay but if there are other programs that we want to fund these

1:34:12 federal programs are available to do so

1:34:16 so those two are not mutually exclusive okay all right well it’s

1:34:19 something that i would like for us

1:34:21 to to consider moving forward there’s several things that our

1:34:25 our district needs to look at um one of

1:34:27 the things that i’m very passionate about is this k-3 reading

1:34:30 that we need to focus in on um and so i’ve

1:34:32 been looking into the orton gillingham program as far as

1:34:35 training some of our educators on this and the

1:34:37 success that they’ve had and so i just want us to be thinking

1:34:41 about this as i gather more information and

1:34:44 bring it back forward because i think this is something that

1:34:46 could be impactful that we will see

1:34:47 tremendous dividends on over the course of years if we could

1:34:50 focus on getting our teachers

1:34:52 up to date and trained on this hang on let me just ask her so

1:34:57 what you’re what i what i’m hearing

1:34:59 you say in the charge to the board is there’s a the money that

1:35:02 was down there at the bottom on i think

1:35:04 it was page four you had concerns about it going there because

1:35:07 you wanted to try to possibly reallocate

1:35:08 towards something else well that that is true but it sounds like

1:35:11 from his hand it’s not either or

1:35:13 correct correct okay so if there are other other training

1:35:16 programs the board would like us to

1:35:18 explore we have the opportunity to do so as we’re developing our

1:35:21 federal programs for the upcoming

1:35:23 sounds good so who decided or you decided this right that

1:35:25 somebody presented this to you or something

1:35:27 i guess i just wasn’t clear on that process on how that happened

1:35:30 so uh dr sullivan and i got together

1:35:32 on this and she recommended that we could utilize the funds in

1:35:35 an expeditious manner for something we

1:35:37 needed to do and so we repurposed them in this manner okay and

1:35:41 the only reason is i mean that that money

1:35:44 really was kind of earmarked for professional development of

1:35:47 some sort right i mean it’s a training

1:35:49 can i please title four is actually not our professional

1:35:54 development grant title two

1:35:57 is the conscious discipline applied to title four because of the

1:36:01 second scope of work that is targeted

1:36:03 on student well-being discipline counseling and support so it

1:36:07 actually fit into the grant not as a

1:36:09 professional development item but as a discipline item the grant

1:36:13 has three specific scopes of which

1:36:15 we can apply for so we generally will keep we call it a

1:36:19 graveyard of things that we either underfund or

1:36:23 priorities that don’t make it and we try to always stick with

1:36:27 previously identified board priorities to

1:36:29 fill those gaps none of that’s been approved just prioritizing

1:36:33 but this grant is not the professional

1:36:35 development grant we have a title ii grant that is and then we

1:36:39 can always adjust and make professional

1:36:42 development requirements reading actually wouldn’t fit into the

1:36:45 title four grant it would not it would

1:36:47 not all right thank you but there is there’s we can we we

1:36:52 generally will adjust based on the timelines

1:36:55 and i feel really confident that if the board lands on a

1:36:58 different priority as miss hand said

1:37:00 we can work through the amendment process and readjust

1:37:04 priorities okay yeah all right thank you thank you

1:37:07 miss sullivan i think um miss campbell yep um so thank you for

1:37:11 clarifying that on the the purposes of

1:37:13 the title four grant i appreciate that and just um to address i

1:37:18 think some were a concern i heard in

1:37:20 there miss right you know if if any of these items are over 50

1:37:23 000 it will it will come back to us right

1:37:25 that’s why the other one came back to it came to us because it

1:37:28 was within the scope of the grant but it

1:37:30 was over 50 000 so the superintendent can’t approve that by

1:37:33 himself by herself um the i i just uh last

1:37:38 night uh mr susan miss jenkins and myself attended the bright

1:37:42 nehemiah

1:37:43 action my action event there was a lot of stuff there was yeah

1:37:49 and so one of the things that they

1:37:51 were challenged i don’t know if you guys got a chance to meet

1:37:53 with bright but um they were talking about

1:37:55 science of reading and i had i i called jane klein yesterday and

1:37:58 said hey where are we on the science

1:38:00 of reading and she shared with me about the work that we’re

1:38:02 already doing to train our in this this

1:38:06 great body of research has come out you know getting rid of the

1:38:09 or looking past you know the three cueing

1:38:11 method and the whole and to this very specific so i before we uh

1:38:15 i would encourage you to talk to her about

1:38:17 the training that we’ve we’ve launched into uh specifically it’s

1:38:22 tackling phonics phonemic awareness

1:38:24 those those five i think they’re a core things that are part of

1:38:27 the that body of research science of

1:38:29 reading so i just encourage you to have that conversation with

1:38:31 her about what’s already being done

1:38:32 in in that uh realm

1:38:34 okay uh mr trent

1:38:44 well i’m hoping uh hoping we uh continue looking at behavioral

1:38:48 trainings uh with maybe the title four

1:38:51 funds other programs i’m sure they’re as soon as the vote came

1:38:55 down last time they were thinking of

1:38:58 what’s next i know i’ve gotten some calls on other programs so

1:39:02 uh i i look forward to that conversation

1:39:05 uh i mean i said my piece on this last time we had this

1:39:14 conversation uh i trust our staff their expertise

1:39:17 their professionalism to always present what they think is best

1:39:20 for our students and our staff

1:39:22 uh clearly i believe that this was best for our students and

1:39:25 staff as well as they did

1:39:28 so i think asking them to come back with some other program so

1:39:32 quickly uh is unrealistic it would be

1:39:36 disingenuine of them to come forward with something else that

1:39:38 they don’t necessarily have the buy-in

1:39:40 themselves we also as you can see at the beginning of this

1:39:43 presentation are committed to because there

1:39:46 is no refund 132 participants still going through conscious

1:39:50 discipline training and implementing it within

1:39:53 their classrooms i said this last time i think we didn’t ask our

1:39:57 staff and our schools that are using

1:39:59 this program how they feel about it being ceased so once it is i

1:40:03 think it would be in the best interest

1:40:04 of this board to ask the staff in the schools how they feel when

1:40:08 it is removed from their from

1:40:09 their school and how it’s impacting them all right and with that

1:40:13 i would say that i have asked staff and

1:40:15 i have moved through and being a former teacher for nine years i

1:40:19 know that part of getting a hold of

1:40:20 discipline is is that you have some sort of classroom management

1:40:23 and there’s a lot of programs that we

1:40:25 have inside of our school district that are underfunded that go

1:40:28 into that regard i would say that for

1:40:30 the past five no probably four years i’ve advocated um

1:40:35 absolutely for a program that comes out of escambia

1:40:38 county with amazing metrics and amazing results i think that we

1:40:42 as a as a school district have an opportunity

1:40:45 um as hand said that some of those are going to be presented to

1:40:48 us on may 9th i appreciate it

1:40:49 and i think that there’s pretty much board consensus to hold on

1:40:52 um actually spending any of that money

1:40:55 on robotics and all that other stuff until we hear from the may

1:40:57 9th group that we may be able to

1:40:59 expand some of that um you may want to have somebody talk about

1:41:02 some of those other things that you

1:41:04 were talking about does that make sense sorry i’m not sure so

1:41:07 may 9th there’s going to be some

1:41:08 opportunities to come forward with presentations and stuff that

1:41:10 are already existing programs inside of

1:41:12 our district that might help that is that about right so we’ve

1:41:15 convened a little focus group of folks that work

1:41:18 on recruitment retention training so talking about kind of all

1:41:22 of these issues that blend together

1:41:25 and so i think we can provide some briefings to you as we’re

1:41:28 working through the process but we’ve

1:41:30 got there’s a lot of moving parts yeah it’s probably the best

1:41:34 way to say it and all of these things

1:41:36 relate to one and other so as we talk through the discipline

1:41:40 audit for example there’s pieces of that

1:41:42 that relate to pieces of this our training we’ve had a lot of

1:41:45 conversation with our teachers union about

1:41:48 the types of training that they would like to have so i’ve

1:41:51 started to talk with our um our professional

1:41:53 development folks and trying to engage them with our student

1:41:56 services folks our leading learning folks

1:41:58 so we’re we’re all talking together about the best way to

1:42:00 deliver these services i think that’s a great

1:42:03 conversation for all of us to learn and see what’s out there and

1:42:06 see where the things is and it comes

1:42:07 directly with what miss jenkins had said where we listen to

1:42:10 staff and they present to us and we work

1:42:12 from there i think that’s a good point because i i when you were

1:42:15 summarizing it sounded like you were

1:42:17 summarizing saying that we all had consensus to put a hold on

1:42:20 the robotics said not all of us i said

1:42:22 there was a consensus well i didn’t know that we were i don’t

1:42:25 think i weighed in on that well it hasn’t

1:42:27 been brought before us so i’m assuming that’s just like kind of

1:42:29 what they’re they’re planning on doing

1:42:31 no that is different these is what if you’re asking for there’s

1:42:35 there’s reallocating 240 000

1:42:38 to stem robotics and all that stuff what i thought i heard and i

1:42:41 may have been incorrect is that instead

1:42:43 of allocating to them that we may be able to pause and use them

1:42:46 towards so that we’re not being restricted

1:42:48 into any of those type programs that we hear coming forward that

1:42:51 was all so the 240 we need we’ve

1:42:56 already submitted the amendment to the state we’re waiting for

1:42:58 the state to approve the amendment and

1:43:00 then we’d like to spend it on those items that are in the

1:43:03 presentation that’s roll forward money that

1:43:06 we need to we need to spend we still have a lot of opportunity

1:43:10 to bring forward different ideas on

1:43:13 professional development through our federal programs that we

1:43:17 can present to you so so those two things

1:43:19 are not mutually exclusive but i i would i would recommend that

1:43:23 we not pivot on the the 240 at this

1:43:26 point in time because i think we need we need to move forward

1:43:29 and these are things that we need to buy

1:43:31 okay and the clock is ticking and i think correct i think that

1:43:34 for some of the public to see what’s going

1:43:36 on i think one of the keys is is that the board is realigning

1:43:40 some of their priorities and i think that

1:43:42 that’s what’s happening is and we are in the process of learning

1:43:46 some of these for the first time so

1:43:47 thank you so much for for allocating and understanding and

1:43:50 everything else and just in the interest of

1:43:53 transparency if if folks are interested in what we’re doing with

1:43:57 our federal programs that there is

1:43:59 information on our website the full application as to how these

1:44:03 monies are being spent as well as

1:44:05 the amendments requested those are all on the website so if you

1:44:08 go to departments and programs and look under

1:44:10 title one title two title four the information is there and

1:44:13 available for the public to see that’s awesome

1:44:16 i just i just want to add in here i thank you because i think

1:44:19 this actually you you mentioned this

1:44:22 alliance with board priorities that we have clearly said we want

1:44:24 to be to i’m going to quote you mr susan

1:44:27 the district that sends students to space not currently like in

1:44:31 their current form but in the future send

1:44:33 them to space um and so stem robotics cte labs that that very

1:44:38 well aligns with what this board has been

1:44:41 consistent in saying so good job i have a request um uh i would

1:44:46 like mr susan if you could inform your

1:44:49 fellow board members the schools that you visited and if you

1:44:52 have any correspondences with those staff

1:44:54 that feel a negative way towards it to share it with us because

1:44:57 if we’re going to be making decisions about

1:44:59 this going forward it would be helpful for us all to be privy to

1:45:02 that same information are you speaking

1:45:04 to conscious discipline now is that what you’re saying miss jenkins

1:45:07 yes i’m trying to figure out

1:45:08 what you’re saying yes mr susan i am not going to point of order

1:45:11 i’m not done point of order thank you

1:45:14 i asked you a question mr susan i wasn’t done talking thank you

1:45:18 when i make a statement for us to do our

1:45:21 due diligence and ask our staff that we’re impacting how they

1:45:24 feel about a program being removed and your

1:45:26 rebuttal is that you already has as if as if that is end all be

1:45:31 all well then i think that the rest of

1:45:33 the board deserves to hear the responses that you had because i

1:45:36 too was an educator for six years i too

1:45:39 had personal experience with conscious discipline clearly my

1:45:41 perspective is very different than yours

1:45:44 and the perspective of our 4500 teachers is going to be very

1:45:47 different as well and diverse and so

1:45:50 if you are hearing differently it would be beneficial for me to

1:45:54 see those responses so yes i am requesting

1:45:58 this communication that you claim that you had to be shared with

1:46:02 the entire board and if i get any

1:46:04 communication i will do the same miss um jenkins i would remind

1:46:09 you that as soon as you start putting

1:46:11 people’s names and information out there that they can miss jenkins

1:46:15 i am finishing my answer to your

1:46:17 question you know what forget it forget it you can redact their

1:46:20 names let’s move on let’s move on

1:46:22 all right thank you so much i appreciate it

1:46:24 the next topic is mcoa recommendation athletics follow-up

1:46:34 yes sir dr sullivan will be briefing you on this topic

1:46:48 working on a segue and i’m just struggling um but one thing i do

1:46:57 know is that um we all really care

1:47:01 about the safety of our students um a couple weeks ago a month

1:47:05 ago now i’m not sure it’s a bit of a

1:47:07 blur you all had a board presentation on athletics athletic

1:47:10 issues and athletic concerns little did i

1:47:13 know on that day that i would be taking responsibility for

1:47:17 athletics um so in the past couple weeks um

1:47:21 i have worked alongside my directors um school principals

1:47:24 athletic directors and officials to to

1:47:27 understand some of the immediate problems and one of the

1:47:31 immediate problems at hand is our contract with

1:47:34 our mid-coast officials association and it’s an immediate issue

1:47:39 of course because we’ve got to get

1:47:41 it in place for the start of the year but there were some

1:47:43 challenges that really needed to be resolved

1:47:45 particularly in terms of timeliness of pay of the officials if

1:47:49 you all recall from that presentation

1:47:53 and the reason for that delay they’re just multiple multiple

1:47:56 points of failure if you will in large part

1:48:00 the schools do not have the funds to initiate the original

1:48:04 purchase orders so typically in a situation

1:48:06 in the fall you would enter a purchase order for the season and

1:48:10 pay against that purchase order that

1:48:13 encumbers all of your funds and so this many of our schools did

1:48:16 not have enough funds to even open

1:48:19 the purchase order to be able to pay against the invoices the

1:48:23 second thing of course is processing time

1:48:27 with the mid-coast officials they have to essentially by hand

1:48:32 into every roster for every school for every

1:48:35 set of contests to generate the invoice process those invoices

1:48:39 were handled very differently at the different

1:48:42 schools with very different outcomes the core of the issue comes

1:48:47 down to finances

1:48:48 right now through athletic equity the board for the last several

1:48:54 years has been allocating around

1:48:55 two hundred thousand dollars a year to try to help offset some

1:48:59 of the fees as a former principal

1:49:01 i can tell you that you got a couple of buckets if you have a

1:49:04 home game you have to pay officials if

1:49:07 you have an away game you have to pay transportation not to

1:49:10 mention all of the other elements that come

1:49:13 into it and so what i saw in the contract is there was

1:49:16 suggestions of decreasing officials

1:49:19 and recommendations that would in my opinion be detrimental to

1:49:25 district and allowing them to have

1:49:28 less than recommended officials just because of the cost and and

1:49:31 i think in my opinion looking at the

1:49:34 history of it that we need to consider increasing our funding

1:49:37 commitment to the schools to maintain a

1:49:40 safe environment i know the board for several years has

1:49:44 discussed what does those funds look like what

1:49:47 does equity look like and my recommendation is that the district

1:49:51 equitably fund all officials

1:49:54 and so uh doing that serves two things one it definitely

1:49:58 increases the board commitment so the board

1:50:00 commitment would increase from 200 000 a year to 550 000 a year

1:50:07 however i think the district is very

1:50:10 vulnerable in the fact that we have paid those official bills on

1:50:14 the backs of uh ticket sales and for the

1:50:18 vast majority of our sports the ticket sales does not come close

1:50:22 to covering the cost of the officials

1:50:25 and safety really is weighing on me so i’ve been wearing this

1:50:28 athletics hat for just a couple weeks

1:50:30 but it worked for a long time as a principal and just how we

1:50:35 support this as a district and how we’ve

1:50:39 sort of left schools to fend for themselves it has been weighing

1:50:43 on me so my recommendation is the board

1:50:45 consider that increase to that allocation with that allocation

1:50:50 at the district level we would manage

1:50:52 all of the accounting logistics and processing for the mcoa and

1:50:58 i’ll just give an example of what that

1:51:01 might look like and it’s something we do right now with dual

1:51:04 enrollment and some other funds so

1:51:07 the invoices would come to us the newly hired county athletic

1:51:11 director would cross-reference those we

1:51:13 would pay those invoices out we do it with school nurses we do

1:51:16 with dual enrollment we do it with a ton

1:51:19 of different areas it’s not problematic you know we love

1:51:22 spreadsheets so we’ll keep lots of detailed

1:51:24 records on the different amounts right now for the average of

1:51:28 the last two years officials have cost us

1:51:30 around 528 000 i’m recommending 550 000 just because i’m unclear

1:51:37 and for this first year until we get a

1:51:40 tighter reign we’ve added sports and i want to make sure that

1:51:43 there’s appropriate funding there

1:51:45 the reason we are bringing this recommendation to you in advance

1:51:49 of the other recommendations

1:51:51 is the contract process with mcoa and so we’re looking for that

1:51:57 informal three thumbs up

1:52:00 to build out the contract under that expectation in terms of

1:52:06 funding possibilities

1:52:08 in discussion of course extensive discussions with miss hand

1:52:13 this is something that could be

1:52:14 fund 100 or could be millage as well to be to be determined

1:52:19 because athletic support

1:52:21 was one of our identified areas in what we gave to the voters on

1:52:26 that program development bucket that

1:52:28 we’re calling b1 to be specific and so we know that that’s

1:52:34 something that could look at but in terms of

1:52:37 developing out the system to begin the contracting in the fall

1:52:41 we’re asking the board for any questions or follow-up or if they

1:52:46 feel

1:52:46 feel strongly against adding the funds towards athletics.

1:52:50 I’d let you know we need to know that

1:52:51 and go back to the drawing board

1:52:53 or feeling confident that the board could take it.

1:52:56 From my lens as a principal of a school

1:52:59 without a lot of money in the past,

1:53:02 the equity of just knowing

1:53:03 that your officials are covered is huge.

1:53:06 I went out to all the principals

1:53:08 and it’s just unilateral support as you can imagine.

1:53:12 The time and effort and processing on the schools,

1:53:15 they would very much appreciate the help

1:53:17 in trying to manage that,

1:53:20 as well as just one less thing,

1:53:23 because in my opinion,

1:53:26 having officials at every contest

1:53:28 is not something that should be second guessed

1:53:31 based on the difficulties they’re having with finance.

1:53:34 And so I just ask the board for their consideration.

1:53:37 Happy to answer any questions

1:53:38 within my couple weeks on this hat.

1:53:42 But again, lots of years on the school-based hat

1:53:45 of trying to do it and to move forward

1:53:48 and working out the contract with the officials.

1:53:50 - Thank you, Dr. Sullivan.

1:53:52 Does anybody wish to comment on this?

1:53:54 Mr. Trent.

1:53:56 - We’re good.

1:53:57 - So this would cover middle schools as well?

1:53:59 - Yes, ma’am.

1:54:00 - And then, so really, I mean,

1:54:03 you were talking about a seismic shift,

1:54:05 but you know, a big shift,

1:54:07 because not only would we be taking care of that,

1:54:09 that all those ticket sales, then would be able,

1:54:11 the schools would be able to use this

1:54:12 to pour back into the programs to buy equipment.

1:54:14 - Exactly.

1:54:15 - And pay for training and all the other things

1:54:17 that they have to cover.

1:54:18 - Exactly.

1:54:19 So right now, high school, for example,

1:54:23 an average high school has been receiving about $12,000

1:54:26 in that $200,000 bucket.

1:54:29 The officials’ bills are typically between $35,000 and $40,000.

1:54:34 So out of the money that’s coming into the program,

1:54:37 the vast majority of it is going out to officials.

1:54:40 And so things like transportation, you know, balls,

1:54:45 things that you need, safety equipment,

1:54:47 there are a lot of things that have to get cut,

1:54:49 because you have to pay for officials.

1:54:52 And so our families that are raising money,

1:54:56 all of those things that are happening,

1:54:57 I think about the communities, and yeah,

1:55:01 it understand that you have to raise money

1:55:02 for like the nicer uniform or the fancy bat,

1:55:06 but you would hope not for the bare bones execution

1:55:11 of the activity.

1:55:12 And so by taking that burden and as a district being clear,

1:55:17 like, you know, we can’t necessarily support athletics

1:55:22 and activities at how we would all hope and dream,

1:55:25 but from a safety point of view,

1:55:26 we’re gonna cover officials in every site.

1:55:28 I just think it’s really important.

1:55:30 - Yeah, thank you for answering that question.

1:55:32 And I appreciate it and I’m in support.

1:55:33 - Thank you.

1:55:34 - Anybody else?

1:55:36 - Yeah, I too am in support.

1:55:38 So I met with a former athletic director,

1:55:40 and I don’t know if his stats were true,

1:55:41 but what he said to me was that 9,000

1:55:43 of our high school students,

1:55:46 approximately 13.5% of them participate in a sport.

1:55:50 So he said that this is a tremendous amount of our population.

1:55:54 And then not to mention, we have a lot of state champs

1:55:56 and a lot of different sporting arenas.

1:55:58 So I 100% support that.

1:56:00 I’m glad that this is something that we can take off

1:56:02 of the schools and I think it’ll help support the children

1:56:04 in the athletics department.

1:56:05 So thank you for bringing this forward.

1:56:07 This will be a good thing.

1:56:07 - Thank you.

1:56:10 - Absolutely, this should be something that’s done

1:56:12 at the district level.

1:56:13 I won’t burden you with all the ideas in education,

1:56:19 or in athletics.

1:56:21 I’m hoping the new person in that position,

1:56:24 we have lots to talk about,

1:56:26 about what the individual schools can do

1:56:27 with the gate money.

1:56:28 - Yep.

1:56:30 - Even the cost of students entering events,

1:56:33 would really like to see that nearly nothing.

1:56:36 We need more kids,

1:56:37 more students taking advantage of activities.

1:56:41 But on this part,

1:56:42 thank you for doing this.

1:56:45 - Thank you.

1:56:45 - Ms. Jenkins.

1:56:47 - You obviously have my support

1:56:48 and thank you again for putting another hat

1:56:51 on top of your rack.

1:56:52 Appreciate you.

1:56:53 - Thank you.

1:56:55 I think, I’m not sure,

1:56:56 but there was another official group

1:57:00 that was coming in that was like basketball.

1:57:02 They had started conversations about six, eight months ago.

1:57:07 I’ll have them contact you just to make sure that,

1:57:09 ‘cause I know the MCOA is one,

1:57:12 but there was another group that because of the,

1:57:15 because of what we were doing,

1:57:16 had decimated the amount of umpires,

1:57:18 referees and stuff in certain sports,

1:57:20 to where the MCOA could not,

1:57:22 you know what I mean, give some,

1:57:23 they were having troubles.

1:57:24 So this other group came in.

1:57:25 So I just remembered that.

1:57:27 So I’ll get them in contact to make sure

1:57:28 that in the event that they’re in there.

1:57:30 - Okay.

1:57:31 - I think the guy’s name’s Scooter.

1:57:32 He’s from Titusville.

1:57:33 He runs, he, yeah.

1:57:35 - Sounds about right.

1:57:35 - Yeah.

1:57:36 - Thanks.

1:57:37 - I’ll be in touch with that.

1:57:39 - I’ll add it to the list.

1:57:40 - Thank you.

1:57:41 - But no, he’s a really good guy.

1:57:42 Anyway, so this is also, just so everybody knows,

1:57:47 this is a big deal because if we centralize this

1:57:50 and pay it out of the school district,

1:57:51 we have referees that are getting paid on a regular basis

1:57:54 and more routine rather than the other piece,

1:57:56 which was killing us for retention and recruitment

1:57:59 because we were losing reps

1:58:00 because they were sometimes waiting months to get paid

1:58:02 for like repping a game, which was unfair.

1:58:05 Dr. Sullivan, this is huge.

1:58:07 Thank you so much.

1:58:07 I really appreciate it.

1:58:08 And the emphasis on safety is 100% right.

1:58:12 - We appreciate it.

1:58:13 And we’ll certainly work towards the contract

1:58:16 now that we know we have the board permission

1:58:19 and working very well with Mr. Muzzy

1:58:22 and we will proceed.

1:58:24 Thank you.

1:58:25 - Thank you, Dr. Sullivan.

1:58:26 The next up is a topic of a draft charter

1:58:28 independent citizens committee for millage oversight.

1:58:32 Is that you, Ms. Sue?

1:58:33 - Yes, sir.

1:58:34 I’m gonna introduce this.

1:58:35 Ms. Lisinski and Mr. Gibbs and I worked on this together.

1:58:38 We modeled this after the independent citizens oversight

1:58:41 committee for the sales surtax.

1:58:43 It’s recognizing that the millage is a little bit different

1:58:45 because it’s more on the operation side

1:58:47 and there’s quite a bit that goes on the compensation side.

1:58:49 Versus the capital side.

1:58:50 But just to kind of run through some of the highlights,

1:58:54 the purpose of the independent citizens oversight committee,

1:58:57 very similar, is simply to oversee, not direct,

1:59:02 but to review how the millage is spent.

1:59:07 The term, we talked about it and felt like in this case,

1:59:10 because the millage is a four year program,

1:59:13 that we would, the term of office,

1:59:15 we would recommend be the full four years.

1:59:17 And then if, if it needed to be extended,

1:59:19 the board could do that at that time.

1:59:20 But it seemed like a better idea to just have it coincident

1:59:23 with the entire term of the millage.

1:59:25 One of the challenges I have with the surtax citizens oversight

1:59:28 committee

1:59:29 is the terms are staggered in two years and it just, it gets

1:59:32 very confusing.

1:59:33 So this would keep the group together for the full four years.

1:59:36 Like the surtax, we recommended annual reports to both the board

1:59:42 and the audit committee as we do with the surtax with

1:59:45 intermittent reports.

1:59:46 Recommended a minimum quarterly, not, I’m sorry, I’m not going

1:59:50 to say that.

1:59:50 Not quarterly, but a minimum four times a year with the way the

1:59:55 millage revenue comes in,

1:59:56 quarterly may not make exact sense.

1:59:59 So we might be, might make more sense to have a January meeting

2:00:03 and a February meeting and then an August meeting,

2:00:05 something like that versus strict quarterly.

2:00:08 So we just said minimum of four times per year.

2:00:11 With the surtax, it says quarterly and we actually meet six

2:00:15 times per year

2:00:16 because that, I think, benefits us to have the group be together

2:00:19 every other month.

2:00:21 May not be the same with the surtax or with the millage

2:00:23 because of the big revenue that comes in in December

2:00:28 versus the surtaxes every month.

2:00:31 So that the revenue stream is a little bit different.

2:00:34 We did recommend a similar membership structure,

2:00:37 no less than seven, no more than 11 members.

2:00:39 That’s worked really well with the surtax citizens oversight

2:00:44 committee.

2:00:44 The qualifications for the members would be folks that are in

2:00:51 fields relating to the purpose of the millage.

2:00:53 On the surtax side, it was a little more capital oriented.

2:00:57 So we had construction finance type folks, but on the millage

2:01:01 side,

2:01:01 I think it’s a little bit broader.

2:01:03 So we left it much more, much more broad.

2:01:07 The terms would be, again, starting July 1st through June 30th,

2:01:12 2027.

2:01:14 And I believe that sums up the points in the charter.

2:01:20 I’d like to get this on an upcoming board agenda because I’d

2:01:24 like to get it approved.

2:01:26 And then the next item, I’ll talk a little bit about how we

2:01:28 solicit members.

2:01:29 But I’d like to get going so that we do have this body seated in

2:01:34 July.

2:01:34 Everybody okay with just giving her the thumbs up to move on it?

2:01:36 Yeah, absolutely.

2:01:37 Okay.

2:01:38 We’re good.

2:01:39 Thank you very much.

2:01:40 Yep.

2:01:41 And then the follow on item is the member selection process.

2:01:44 Some of you may have been here when we did the surtax.

2:01:48 I know, Mr. Seusson, you were a part of that selection process

2:01:52 as a member.

2:01:54 But this was kind of done independently in terms of the initial

2:01:58 proffering of candidates

2:02:00 for the independent oversight committee to the board.

2:02:04 I’ve talked with Ms. Kershaw and met with the board at Brevard

2:02:07 School Foundation.

2:02:08 They are willing to take on the vetting process, so the

2:02:11 applications would be sent to them.

2:02:13 They would review the applications and present a recommended

2:02:17 slate of members to the school

2:02:18 board.

2:02:19 There’s lots of other ways to do this, but I thought I would

2:02:22 propose one way that we could

2:02:24 do that that is somewhat independent from the school board to

2:02:27 create that initial independent

2:02:29 group.

2:02:30 Okay.

2:02:31 Yeah.

2:02:32 They’ll bring back the recommendations of who, once they vet the

2:02:36 candidates and then we at

2:02:38 that point will select.

2:02:39 Yes.

2:02:40 The school board makes the actual selection.

2:02:42 The Brevard Schools Foundation or another independent group

2:02:45 would vet the applications, review them,

2:02:48 and make a recommendation to you.

2:02:49 Okay.

2:02:50 Thank you.

2:02:51 So I just had a question because I was looking, when I was

2:02:54 reading the last agenda, I was like,

2:02:56 well, how did that first group get picked?

2:02:58 Because now what we do is, with ICOC, if someone rotates off or

2:03:03 they resign or whatever,

2:03:05 then the ICOC takes applications and they pick their own members.

2:03:08 Correct.

2:03:09 And that’s how it would be set forward in the future.

2:03:11 Correct.

2:03:12 But I, in the, with this other, with the ICOC, the group was

2:03:18 selected by the chambers and kind

2:03:23 of I know what’s that.

2:03:24 So are we talking about just foregoing that?

2:03:27 Okay.

2:03:28 That became a process in and of itself.

2:03:30 Okay.

2:03:31 I wasn’t here when that happened either.

2:03:34 So I don’t fully know.

2:03:36 But my understanding of that process is it was a process to

2:03:39 select the process and got a

2:03:41 little bit unwieldy.

2:03:42 So I felt like this was a good option that already includes

2:03:48 community members that could take

2:03:50 a look at the potential applications.

2:03:52 But there are certainly other options if the board would like us

2:03:54 to do something different.

2:03:55 Okay.

2:03:56 And then just, just again, going back to the charter then, if

2:04:01 there were to be any vacancies because

2:04:03 someone resigned or moved away or we need to, we renew it and

2:04:06 somebody decided not to read

2:04:08 up.

2:04:09 Okay.

2:04:10 So then that would be just like the AOC, the actual committee

2:04:12 would select their own members?

2:04:13 Yes, ma’am.

2:04:14 It would go through the, go through the citizens oversight

2:04:16 committee to review applications and

2:04:18 then make a recommendation to the board for the appointment.

2:04:20 Okay.

2:04:21 So you’re right.

2:04:22 So, so the, so the Vavard Schools Foundation would just be the

2:04:24 kind of like FSBA and our superintendent

2:04:26 search.

2:04:27 They’re, they’re the ones.

2:04:28 Correct.

2:04:29 Taking applications and organizing them for us.

2:04:30 Correct.

2:04:31 Okay.

2:04:33 Thank you.

2:04:34 Okay.

2:04:35 Anybody else?

2:04:36 I think you’re good to go.

2:04:37 Good to go.

2:04:38 Yep.

2:04:39 All right.

2:04:40 Thank you very much.

2:04:41 All right.

2:04:42 Next up is the review, the 2000 policies.

2:04:47 If you guys want to take a second, I think an hour and a half,

2:04:53 they cut me down there.

2:04:56 If we, you guys want to take a break for a couple of minutes.

2:05:00 All right.

2:05:01 Let’s take a five minute break and get back here quick.

2:05:30 Thank you.

2:15:31 kinds of stuff and I think the one we have is good for now. Good

2:15:39 with that Paul, move on? Okay, next one is 2110, 2110 Statement

2:15:53 of Philosophy. Again, it references the standard policy on top

2:15:59 of it. I think

2:16:00 what’s that? So I figured this out after our last meeting. If

2:16:06 you go to the bottom of the yellow version, it says last

2:16:07 modified by Tammy Schroyer. That was when she pulled them all,

2:16:10 but the copyright date is going to be the teller. The copyright

2:16:14 date is the same as ours, so they don’t have any updates. Yep,

2:16:18 so as far as I’m concerned, this one looks good, 2110. If you

2:16:22 guys are okay with that, we can move on to the next one. Good,

2:16:26 we good?

2:16:29 Ms. Jenkins, are you good? Okay, next one is 2111.

2:16:33 You have, this is parent and family involvement in the school

2:16:39 program. It references two of the policies that are, that are

2:16:43 pretty in there. And then if you look at, sorry, pretty in there

2:16:47 is kind of ridiculous.

2:16:47 Yeah, we have the implementation portion, which we do not.

2:16:51 Yep. So there, on this one, I noticed when we started, in Neola’s

2:16:56 version, we started getting to the bottom half, the newer

2:16:58 section that we, ours doesn’t include. It looks like it’s coming

2:17:01 straight out of the Parents’ Bill of Rights. And we did

2:17:03 implement a policy that we had all that language in there.

2:17:09 I remember the number, and I didn’t get a chance to go find it.

2:17:12 But I might, are you with, you remember Paul?

2:17:15 I remember doing something. I don’t remember off the top of my

2:17:19 head.

2:17:19 Come on, Paul.

2:17:20 I don’t remember what number it is off the top of my head.

2:17:22 There’s a couple of little things. So mine suggested, there’s a

2:17:25 couple of little things in here besides that part. I don’t know

2:17:29 if we need to add all of that if we already have it somewhere

2:17:30 else.

2:17:30 You mean the implementation portion of this?

2:17:32 Yeah. So what’s missing?

2:17:33 Right. So the part, yes, the implementation part is pretty much,

2:17:38 if you look, if you look at that, if you’re familiar with the

2:17:40 language from the Parents’ Bill of Rights, it’s practically verbatim.

2:17:43 So, but I think we already have that somewhere else, and that’s

2:17:45 what I can’t remember. So, I, but I would like us to, I think we

2:17:48 should take a look at some of it, just because there were a few

2:17:52 things.

2:17:52 Let me just check them all.

2:17:56 Up towards the top.

2:17:58 All right.

2:17:59 I will, I will have, if you will notice the bold note at the

2:18:02 very bottom of the Neola version, it says that we should select

2:18:05 all the options that have up towards the top in order to comply

2:18:10 with state and federal law and title one.

2:18:14 I’m okay with that.

2:18:15 Yeah, but there was a few things, small things, but I don’t,

2:18:19 they have that extra paragraph about the Elementary and Secondary

2:18:24 Education Act.

2:18:25 I think that was just defined to parents.

2:18:27 I think we kind of got that with the family’s definition, but

2:18:30 there’s some, a couple other little things I think it might be

2:18:32 good just to take a look at this one.

2:18:34 So omit paragraph two, is that what you’re suggesting?

2:18:36 Oh, I don’t know.

2:18:37 I mean, omit.

2:18:38 She’s just trying to say take a look at it.

2:18:39 Do we have to add it in?

2:18:40 I don’t know if we have to add it in.

2:18:41 We can, if we’re going to look at it.

2:18:43 Okay, that’s fine.

2:18:44 But the other, the other little things are, are down into the,

2:18:47 like relationships with, of the effective communication.

2:18:50 There was a couple of things in there, I think.

2:18:52 Yep.

2:18:53 I liked a lot of the checkoff versions and we can add the

2:18:57 implementation and I think we’re good.

2:19:00 So we can have-

2:19:02 There’s no red flags.

2:19:04 Does that bring this one back?

2:19:06 To match Newell.

2:19:08 I mean, I, this one, our policies is families.

2:19:11 This one references parents.

2:19:12 So it’s probably-

2:19:13 More up to date.

2:19:14 Yeah.

2:19:15 There says parents and families.

2:19:17 I said, I don’t know-

2:19:18 I like the Neola version.

2:19:19 I just like that with those, with all those breaks.

2:19:23 I don’t know what you guys are talking about, but just have

2:19:26 those just like it’s recommended.

2:19:28 That’s what we have.

2:19:29 That’s the, that is the part that is almost identical to what we

2:19:31 have.

2:19:31 Yep.

2:19:33 And then you have the implementation.

2:19:34 Is there anything-

2:19:35 Which I think we have in another policy.

2:19:36 That’s what I’m sure.

2:19:37 I think, I think you can have it in two.

2:19:39 It’s not that big of a deal.

2:19:40 I think we’re okay.

2:19:41 Is everybody okay with that?

2:19:42 Yeah.

2:19:43 All right.

2:19:44 We’re good.

2:19:45 So direction is to just adopt the Neola one.

2:19:47 Next one up is 2-1-2-0 school improvement.

2:19:50 Again, taking a look at that, looking at the Neola template.

2:19:54 I wrote in here, again, I looked at this like almost two months

2:19:58 ago at this point.

2:19:59 So I’m like, I’m having to jog my memory of like, oh, okay.

2:20:02 I wrote in here, missing early warning system section.

2:20:05 I don’t know.

2:20:06 Let me pull up in the Neola and let me see.

2:20:09 Does it have something about that?

2:20:11 Because my note may not make any sense to me right now.

2:20:15 Oh, yeah.

2:20:16 There’s a whole section.

2:20:17 There it is.

2:20:18 Yep.

2:20:19 There’s a, there’s the part about waivers.

2:20:20 We’re in 2-1-20, right?

2:20:21 Yeah.

2:20:22 Yes.

2:20:23 In Neola, there’s a specific list of things that can –

2:20:30 Carl Perkins, general education.

2:20:32 Right, right, right.

2:20:33 And so it just gives the list rather than just saying, it’s

2:20:37 saying the same thing.

2:20:38 Right, right, right.

2:20:40 And so it just gives the list rather than just saying, it’s

2:20:43 saying the same thing.

2:20:45 Right.

2:20:50 And so it just gives the list rather than just saying, it’s

2:20:52 saying the same thing.

2:20:52 But the Neola version is a little more specific.

2:20:53 Yep.

2:20:54 And it talks about the superintendent is authorized to waive

2:21:01 those rather than ours says the board

2:21:05 is authorized to waive.

2:21:06 So what she’s saying is, is that Neola is more specific.

2:21:09 It includes it.

2:21:10 We good to go.

2:21:11 Yeah.

2:21:12 I think we should update it to match Neola.

2:21:14 I mean –

2:21:15 Yep.

2:21:16 I think so too.

2:21:17 I would say that we adopt the Neola version, which is more

2:21:19 updated, has more specific points

2:21:21 on the waivers.

2:21:22 Do we want any other things in the early warning system?

2:21:26 Because it’s – all right.

2:21:27 We need to look at this one for a second.

2:21:29 Sorry.

2:21:30 No, no, no.

2:21:31 No, I’m here.

2:21:32 All right.

2:21:33 Sure.

2:21:35 Paul, are you familiar?

2:21:37 Maybe this is – I don’t want to – Jane’s waving her hand.

2:21:41 That early warning system, is that something you can shed some

2:21:43 light on for us?

2:21:44 Yes.

2:21:45 Is that okay, Ms. Hannah?

2:21:46 Is she – okay.

2:21:47 Thank you.

2:21:48 I don’t want to – I’m not doing any voluntiline today, but if

2:21:54 you can shed some light, that

2:21:56 would help.

2:21:57 Because I’m sure we’re already doing it.

2:21:58 We just may not have her in Donna policy.

2:22:01 So it’s statutorily required.

2:22:05 Excuse me.

2:22:06 I was on a Bureau of School Improvement meeting this morning and

2:22:10 learned there’s going to be

2:22:11 more changes to the school improvement process where they’re

2:22:15 going to take the federal index

2:22:17 and add that component.

2:22:19 So the state currently is rewriting the template because of an

2:22:24 audit that was found for the state

2:22:27 of Florida.

2:22:29 And so they’re trying to – they did not even have the details.

2:22:32 They’re going to have them in June and add that to the school

2:22:36 improvement template that

2:22:38 will be coming forth for next year.

2:22:40 So this might be something that we update, but let’s wait.

2:22:43 Let’s push this one out long enough for everybody to catch up.

2:22:47 I think we’ll be updating it again based on what I learned this

2:22:52 morning is that they’re going

2:22:54 to be adding the subgroup data in a more monitoring piece of the

2:23:01 school improvement process.

2:23:05 We monitor our subgroup data, but it’s not part of the state

2:23:10 template.

2:23:11 And we follow the state template.

2:23:13 Okay.

2:23:15 Should we table this one until it comes back in June?

2:23:17 Because otherwise we’re going to have to go right back in, right?

2:23:19 I think the idea would be we want to adopt the NEOLA piece,

2:23:23 right?

2:23:24 But in the event that there’s other ones that come on, if you’ll

2:23:27 bring something forward when

2:23:28 that happens, that’s perfect.

2:23:29 So NEOLA will adjust the template.

2:23:32 We’re going to get a bunch of them.

2:23:33 If the state changes in June, NEOLA will probably issue their

2:23:36 update.

2:23:36 Okay.

2:23:38 August, September is.

2:23:39 That’s perfect.

2:23:40 As long as we’re within compliance, we’re good.

2:23:42 Yeah.

2:23:43 Thank you.

2:23:44 All right.

2:23:45 Next up.

2:23:46 2125.

2:23:47 I got notes written on this one.

2:23:48 School advisory councils for school improvement and

2:23:50 accountability.

2:23:51 All right.

2:23:52 One of the things that is listed on the first section here for

2:23:56 the school advisory council.

2:23:58 There’s not, it says that we review, but it doesn’t really

2:24:02 review membership.

2:24:03 But how often are we reviewing membership?

2:24:04 I don’t know if we should put something in there to that effect.

2:24:06 Oh, there’s, and there’s.

2:24:07 Yep.

2:24:09 Is it?

2:24:10 Where are you?

2:24:11 I’m in the second paragraph.

2:24:12 The board shall review the membership composition of each

2:24:14 advisory council, but it doesn’t say

2:24:16 when or how, I mean, so it’s, we shall review when.

2:24:19 So a couple of years ago, I asked if we could get all of the SIP

2:24:23 plans.

2:24:24 They’re the school improvement plans that are passed, right?

2:24:26 That are, that come out of each one of the schools.

2:24:28 And, um, I asked, so what they do is, is they create a database

2:24:32 and we log in and we

2:24:34 can click on each school improvement plan.

2:24:35 And basically that’s the roadmap that that school feels is

2:24:38 appropriate for student achievement

2:24:40 and everything else.

2:24:41 It’s, it, it exists right now.

2:24:42 You can go look at the school improvement plans for all of them.

2:24:45 Ms. Klein’s coming or go ahead.

2:24:47 Okay.

2:24:48 The school improvement timeline.

2:24:51 Once we attend the June training from the state, we’ll establish

2:24:55 a timeline.

2:24:56 And when everything is due, we send you that timeline.

2:24:59 And then the school improvement plans come to you for approval

2:25:03 for final approval.

2:25:05 You have approximately two, three weeks to go through and make

2:25:09 any suggestions.

2:25:10 Bring them back to us.

2:25:11 And then we take them back to the school.

2:25:15 So every school, like currently, as Mr. Student just said,

2:25:19 currently you can look at any school

2:25:20 improvement plan in our district.

2:25:22 Okay.

2:25:23 But the school bases their, um, goal based on their student data.

2:25:29 And is that, that, that is looked at annually?

2:25:30 Is that, how often is that done?

2:25:31 Every summer.

2:25:32 Okay.

2:25:33 It shows up on a board, um,

2:25:34 Board agenda item in September?

2:25:35 October-ish.

2:25:36 Okay.

2:25:37 And that document will list the members of the SAC for every

2:25:38 school.

2:25:38 Yes.

2:25:39 So that at that time we would be, that’s when we approve or

2:25:41 review as this policy says.

2:25:42 Good.

2:25:43 Ours is the same.

2:25:43 Ours is, Niela hasn’t updated there since this one was, by the

2:25:43 way.

2:25:43 And I think, I think, um, if you look at this, uh, the advisory

2:25:49 council, the SACs, what, what that is, is there’s, there’s some

2:25:59 statutory

2:25:59 opportunities for us to create more of a collaboration between

2:26:12 the board and some of our advisory committees.

2:26:17 Um, if you read the statutes, it talks about how that’s kind of

2:26:21 under our jurisdiction to work with them because they’re kind of

2:26:25 our, our wing into the schools.

2:26:26 Mm-hm.

2:26:27 So I was, once we get that update and we get to that process, I

2:26:30 may ask all of us to create like a mini advisory team from the

2:26:35 schools that comes and just advises, you know, talks to us, um,

2:26:39 and gives us updates as to what’s going on inside the schools.

2:26:41 So, um, with that, I think we’re good on this, right?

2:26:44 Is everybody okay?

2:26:45 Does anybody have any, anything else that they would like to add

2:26:48 to it?

2:26:49 Hmm.

2:26:50 I mean, are we going to implement the Neola template?

2:26:55 Because again, we don’t have a, a conflict dispute resolution

2:26:58 process that’s tied to this policy here.

2:27:00 I’m sure we have one maybe somewhere else, but.

2:27:02 Hang on just a second.

2:27:03 Because one of the things.

2:27:04 Ours has additional stuff that’s not in Neola.

2:27:07 So it’s going to be, do you want Neola’s template or do you want

2:27:10 to add what we don’t have from Neola’s template into what we’ve

2:27:14 created?

2:27:15 Right.

2:27:16 Um.

2:27:17 Yeah.

2:27:18 I feel like the resolution piece is missing from ours.

2:27:20 So ours, um, speaks about the school recognition funds.

2:27:28 I don’t see that on Neola’s.

2:27:29 It speaks about the annual budget.

2:27:31 I don’t see that on Neola’s.

2:27:37 I thought we had a policy about SAC and I’m not finding it.

2:27:47 So, um.

2:27:48 We did.

2:27:49 It was referenced.

2:27:50 There’s some statutory.

2:27:51 Yeah.

2:27:52 About school improvement plans.

2:27:53 I thought we had, um, I thought we had a policy on school

2:27:54 improvement.

2:27:55 So.

2:27:56 Well, this one in here under duties, it says school improvement.

2:27:58 Yep.

2:27:59 Plan process.

2:28:00 So we may need to add some things.

2:28:01 Is that.

2:28:02 I think what you said was correct in that anything that’s inside

2:28:05 the Neola template that we don’t already have, Paul, would be

2:28:08 something that we could add.

2:28:09 And then that would.

2:28:10 If that’s the direction, we can just take what we, what Neola

2:28:13 has in their template and we don’t have in ours and add it into

2:28:17 ours.

2:28:17 You guys okay with that?

2:28:18 Yeah.

2:28:20 I mean, I can’t see a reason why we would take either one of

2:28:22 these out.

2:28:23 It’s only a couple of things.

2:28:24 Yeah.

2:28:25 That we have additionally that Neola doesn’t.

2:28:27 Does anybody see any reason that we should not have those?

2:28:31 No.

2:28:32 Good.

2:28:33 All right.

2:28:34 If you follow that one there, Paul.

2:28:36 Next one’s 2131.

2:28:38 Um, educational goals.

2:28:40 Uh, this is, uh, if you pull up the Neola templates.

2:28:45 Might be a little bit different.

2:28:48 Actually.

2:28:49 Neola has a 2128.

2:28:50 That’s right.

2:28:51 You’re right.

2:28:52 District Advisory Council.

2:28:54 Because we don’t have a district advisory council.

2:29:01 Oh, where did that go?

2:29:05 This is what, this, what it speaks to inside the statutes.

2:29:10 Um, is this something that districts ever had?

2:29:16 No.

2:29:17 So it’s pretty cool.

2:29:18 If you look at it.

2:29:19 Right.

2:29:20 Yeah.

2:29:21 I mean, I could see the benefit of implementing one of these.

2:29:26 Mm-hmm.

2:29:27 What does the board feel like?

2:29:29 Um, I like it.

2:29:30 And if you read some of the statutes regards to the SAC

2:29:34 committees and stuff like that, it

2:29:35 calls for some of this kind of involvement.

2:29:38 Um, you guys want to discuss it?

2:29:43 Do you guys want to table it because it’s a big, big, big one

2:29:47 and we come back to it?

2:29:49 No, I, I mean, I think we can talk about it.

2:29:50 I think we should talk about it now when we’re here.

2:29:51 Okay.

2:29:52 All right.

2:29:53 Let’s do it.

2:29:54 I think it’s, um, I’m not necessarily saying 100% table it or

2:29:59 that I’m against it or for

2:30:00 it, but, uh, I think implementing something like that would be

2:30:03 an important conversation

2:30:05 after a superintendent is hired as well.

2:30:07 I don’t know.

2:30:08 It’s pretty simple.

2:30:10 I mean, parents, students, community members.

2:30:12 I mean, I don’t know if the superintendent would have anything

2:30:15 to do with telling us, no,

2:30:16 we don’t want students.

2:30:17 So yeah, the only thing is if we were going to give him part of

2:30:21 it.

2:30:21 So if we were going to ask the superintendent to appoint anybody,

2:30:24 um, but again, I don’t

2:30:26 think that that’s, um, I, I think we can have a group like this

2:30:31 with or without a policy,

2:30:32 right?

2:30:33 I mean, so it’s kind of a decision of doing, but you know, one

2:30:35 of the challenges that we

2:30:36 have when we have district wide committees like this is the link,

2:30:41 you know, the, the distance

2:30:43 people have to travel the involvement.

2:30:45 So I, I wonder if rather than one centralized, um, group that’s,

2:30:53 we can make it however big

2:30:55 we want because it, you know, it leaves blanks this many, you

2:30:58 know, it leaves blank, this many

2:30:59 parents, this many students.

2:31:00 Um, you’re talking about going to a regional type.

2:31:04 Or like, yeah, each district has their own kind of, is that what

2:31:07 you’re thinking?

2:31:08 I don’t know.

2:31:09 I mean, because, no, because then we kind of start getting

2:31:11 segmented.

2:31:11 I don’t know.

2:31:12 It’s okay.

2:31:13 I wouldn’t really worry for this conversation today, just to be

2:31:16 honest.

2:31:16 So I’m not, I, you know, like Ms. Jenkins, not opposed to, I

2:31:20 just, um, you talked earlier

2:31:22 about how we have a lot to do.

2:31:24 Well, I, I think that this is basically our backbone.

2:31:28 If we have, I, I, I actually love the idea of bringing parents,

2:31:31 students, community members,

2:31:33 teachers and them to talk to us on a regular basis.

2:31:35 I mean, I, I have, um, my former students that are now having

2:31:41 kids.

2:31:41 So it’s kind of interesting.

2:31:43 So I, I just, I think that this is something that I’d like to do.

2:31:47 I mean, if you guys want to sit here for a second and pound

2:31:49 through it, I’d love to put

2:31:50 something like this together.

2:31:51 But if you’re having some concerns and either way, I’m okay with

2:31:55 it.

2:31:55 Um, what would be the, what I’m trying to look down to see the

2:31:59 purpose, because I’m, what I’m

2:32:01 seeing is we’re going, here’s who’s going to be on the committee.

2:32:05 Here’s how they’re going to be selected.

2:32:07 Yep.

2:32:08 Um, you know, in different ways.

2:32:10 It can come from SACs or can be come from whatever, but there’s

2:32:14 really no definition.

2:32:16 Oh, it says the purpose of the DAC will be to advise.

2:32:19 With regard to the development.

2:32:20 Yep.

2:32:21 With strategic plan, especially in regard to goals.

2:32:26 It looks pretty good.

2:32:28 Right.

2:32:29 Um, as to serve as a major communication link between the

2:32:31 district, the schools and the community.

2:32:34 Um, and so basically to kind of help be that we had, we had that,

2:32:39 we have that in place

2:32:41 with all the community ambassador groups, which were on a much,

2:32:44 much larger scale actually,

2:32:45 because we had, we had faith based, a faith based community

2:32:50 ambassador group.

2:32:52 We had the chambers and a community ambassador group.

2:32:54 We had employee of the year, all the previous employees of the

2:32:57 year and the previous teachers

2:32:58 of the year, those were ambassador groups.

2:32:59 And sometimes it would be broken down.

2:33:01 Like, um, the superintendent would meet with, you know, regionally

2:33:04 everybody from those groups

2:33:06 here, or sometimes be, I’m just going to pull in all the faith

2:33:08 based today, whatever,

2:33:09 and, and throw out the idea.

2:33:10 And they were very involved in the making, the recreation of the

2:33:13 strategic plan.

2:33:14 And with his update.

2:33:15 And so that was kind of on a much larger, uh, scale.

2:33:19 Um, and something honestly in whether formal or informal needs

2:33:23 to continue to happen.

2:33:24 Um, so this is kind of getting more specific and saying, this is

2:33:29 the way we want to get

2:33:30 the community input is through this.

2:33:32 And I think, um, that other one didn’t report to us or

2:33:37 collaborate with us.

2:33:38 It was more about collaborating with Dr. Mullins and staff and

2:33:41 stuff like that.

2:33:42 So I like this.

2:33:43 Well, I mean, we can have it do whatever we wanted to, but I’m

2:33:46 saying we had community

2:33:47 groups, large groups of, you know, into, I, you know, I think

2:33:51 Tammy can probably commit.

2:33:52 It’s about 300 total in the 225.

2:33:56 Um, sorry, ministerially speaking, um, who were involved in, in

2:34:01 getting their input and whether

2:34:04 meetings or, uh, you know, digitally or whatever, virtual

2:34:07 meetings, all different kinds of ways.

2:34:09 So, you know, there’s, there’s lots of ways to do it.

2:34:12 I don’t know that we, um, have to limit it to this.

2:34:16 Was there ever a formal document that they said, these are the

2:34:19 strategic initiatives that we would like?

2:34:21 You know, I think it was just inputted to staff and then staff

2:34:23 took what they said and moved through it.

2:34:25 Something like that, right?

2:34:26 No, actually, I think he usually met with them himself and would

2:34:29 put out, here’s some, you know, first it was a listening tour.

2:34:32 You know, what are the, what are the priorities?

2:34:34 What do you think you’re gonna be working on?

2:34:35 Taking all the input.

2:34:36 I remember he sat down with each of us as board members and went

2:34:38 through actually over multiple one-on-ones because the list was

2:34:41 so long.

2:34:41 What do you think about this?

2:34:42 Where is this on your priority?

2:34:43 This is what I’m hearing from the community, you know,

2:34:45 formulated that, yes, with staff, with the strategic plan.

2:34:48 But, you know, one of the things that in the past, the

2:34:51 superintendent, going back to Dr. Blackburn and maybe previously,

2:34:55 I’m not

2:34:55 familiar to develop the strategic plan.

2:34:57 If we’re gonna move into where the board has more ownership of

2:34:59 the strategic plan, we can do that.

2:35:01 But that community input is still really important.

2:35:06 And then when there were going to be changes or updates, it

2:35:08 would, you know, he would go back out to the same people and say,

2:35:12 here’s where we are.

2:35:12 Let me give you a report card of where we are and what am I

2:35:15 hearing from you.

2:35:16 It was just more informal, but definitely going out with those

2:35:21 strategic plan points.

2:35:23 All right.

2:35:24 I like this opportunity because it keeps it to a smaller tight

2:35:28 knit group to give us direction.

2:35:31 And if the new superintendent would like to come in and create

2:35:33 what that was before, I think that would be a good idea too.

2:35:36 I don’t necessarily disagree with Ms. Jenkins on this maybe

2:35:40 saying that we talked to our new superintendent and have them

2:35:43 involved in this process because it may be a collaboration of

2:35:46 what we had and then this policy together to kind of come up

2:35:49 with what the new superintendent wants.

2:35:51 Or they might have an even better idea.

2:35:52 They might even have a better idea.

2:35:54 They might.

2:35:55 We good.

2:35:56 All right.

2:35:57 Then we’ll pause it.

2:35:58 Let’s go on to the next one, which is.

2:36:01 Keep forgetting to go back to the new one.

2:36:02 All righty.

2:36:02 Two, one, three, one.

2:36:03 Educational outcome.

2:36:04 One’s are shorter.

2:36:05 One, two.

2:36:06 Two, one, three, one, be one.

2:36:07 This is one of the ones that is, unless we see something, this

2:36:20 is one of the ones that has been reviewed within the last five

2:36:28 years.

2:36:28 And we would need to come back to it next year on our continual

2:36:31 rotation.

2:36:32 But this one was updated in 2018.

2:36:35 We’re within the five years.

2:36:37 Yeah.

2:36:38 Or we can just update it now and not worry about it.

2:36:40 Just made it.

2:36:41 All right.

2:36:42 So if you guys take a look at V1 and V2, there’s a little bit of

2:36:46 differences here.

2:36:47 One is, like Ms. Jenkins said, almost exactly like what we have.

2:36:55 And if there’s anything anybody wanted to add, they could.

2:36:59 I have a couple things that I might want to suggest.

2:37:03 V1 goes, I think, a little more in-depth.

2:37:06 Yeah, it looks like it.

2:37:08 But it’s up to you guys.

2:37:10 My concern was is that I wanted to be able to put – I didn’t

2:37:12 see anything in here.

2:37:14 Capacities for fulfilling, satisfying, outstanding,

2:37:17 understanding the ability to cope with change, like all of those

2:37:20 things.

2:37:20 How about like understanding the workforce and ensuring the

2:37:27 success – like understanding what the workforce needs are and

2:37:31 what their opportunities are.

2:37:33 I see the first one job skills for the workplace and skills and

2:37:36 attitudes to obtain further education.

2:37:38 I don’t know.

2:37:41 Sorry.

2:37:42 Give me a minute.

2:37:43 I’m going through them.

2:37:44 Mm-hmm.

2:37:45 I’m telling you, if we implement version 1, that scares me a bit.

2:38:00 Just because I mean, honestly, if you look at some of these

2:38:02 questions, they’re all really great life skills that our

2:38:05 students all should come out of our schools with.

2:38:08 I can speak to the fact that I work with youth every single week

2:38:12 and there’s a lot of these skills that our students do not have.

2:38:15 I’ll push it.

2:38:17 Yeah.

2:38:18 These are goals.

2:38:20 I’m looking at the statutes that they come from.

2:38:22 Actually, some of these are kind of spelled out.

2:38:24 Yep.

2:38:25 I really like version 1.

2:38:31 It’s very detailed, but I like version 1.

2:38:36 I like it too.

2:38:37 I just think what would it look like if every one of our

2:38:43 students came out of our schools with these skills.

2:38:46 Or at least we set that expectation.

2:38:49 Right?

2:38:50 So.

2:38:51 Leisure time.

2:39:00 I know.

2:39:01 I’m like, some of these are really good skills that I’m like,

2:39:04 wow.

2:39:04 This would be.

2:39:05 Anybody else wish to, there’s a kind of a thing on the floor

2:39:09 saying let’s go with version 1.

2:39:11 Are we okay with that?

2:39:12 Yeah.

2:39:13 Anybody object version 1?

2:39:14 Anybody want to tie into it?

2:39:16 Ms. Campbell, you okay with it?

2:39:19 To be quite honest, I didn’t look at the version 1.

2:39:23 You want to take a second?

2:39:25 I don’t make decisions like that, Mr. Seusson.

2:39:28 I’m happy for us to have to bring it back to us and let’s take a

2:39:33 look at them, you know.

2:39:35 I mean, I don’t see anything just looking, breezing through it

2:39:38 that I think is like, oh no, I don’t want our kids to learn that.

2:39:41 You know, I mean, yeah.

2:39:42 Okay.

2:39:43 So you’d like to say go ahead and move forward with V1 and then

2:39:47 if there’s any conversations that you may have or concerns, you

2:39:51 can address them as it goes through the process, right?

2:39:53 Sure.

2:39:54 Okay.

2:39:55 Are you okay with that, Ms. Jenkins?

2:39:57 Yep.

2:39:58 Okay.

2:39:59 All right.

2:40:00 2, 1, 3, 2.

2:40:05 So these are education process goals.

2:40:12 Again, the NEOLA template has been modified in 2003 but it goes

2:40:18 back, the original one looks like we have almost all of them.

2:40:22 The one thing that I was going to mention is that there’s not a

2:40:26 real strict on educational process goals.

2:40:30 It says instruction, you know, needs and interest of students

2:40:34 and all that stuff.

2:40:35 But there’s nothing talking about the relationship of parents

2:40:38 and students and stuff like that.

2:40:40 And I didn’t know if anybody wanted to add something,

2:40:42 constructive cooperation with parents and community groups.

2:40:45 And I guess that’s okay.

2:40:46 But it just doesn’t mean that, it doesn’t tell me like the

2:40:48 parent, like listen to the needs and parents and accept input on

2:40:52 their child for the success of the student.

2:40:55 These are kind of overall process goals.

2:40:56 I didn’t have any…

2:40:56 It mentions parents in F.

2:40:56 It does.

2:40:57 But it’s not…

2:40:58 What was your suggestion as far as changing that?

2:40:59 Just a more specific thing about parents.

2:41:00 But you know, like you’re talking about educational process

2:41:01 goals and we’re talking about collaborating with parents and

2:41:16 then we have in there constructive cooperation with parents and

2:41:19 community groups.

2:41:20 It just feels like it’s kind of part of something else, but it

2:41:23 can be there.

2:41:24 And we have a whole parent’s bill of rights that we can make.

2:41:26 Right.

2:41:27 You know what I mean?

2:41:28 So if you guys are okay, I’m okay.

2:41:29 We can just do all this thing.

2:41:30 I’m okay with this one.

2:41:31 I didn’t mark this one at all.

2:41:32 Yeah.

2:41:33 We’re good?

2:41:34 21:32 is good.

2:41:35 All right, Paul, just update it.

2:41:36 We’re good to go.

2:41:37 And the next one is 2205.

2:41:41 Instructional planning refers to three statutes.

2:41:48 Our old one referred to three statutes.

2:41:50 The new one only refers to one.

2:41:55 It’s kind of weird.

2:42:01 They’re not different, right?

2:42:06 No, it’s exactly the same, but the old one in our book refers to

2:42:10 two other statutes.

2:42:11 Yeah, but I wrote down on mine.

2:42:12 So it looks like the statute for statute 1001.11 speaking about

2:42:16 the commissioner of education.

2:42:18 So I had a question mark and I wrote that because I was like, I

2:42:20 don’t know why this statute is cited here.

2:42:21 It’s probably why they cleaned it up.

2:42:23 And then statute 1008.385 speaks about educational planning and

2:42:27 info system.

2:42:28 So I wrote down notes on those, which I’m thinking maybe I was

2:42:30 looking at the statute thinking this doesn’t really correlate to

2:42:33 what we’re speaking about, which might be why they decided to

2:42:36 take them out of there.

2:42:37 So this version is exactly like the one we have.

2:42:42 So if you guys are okay, we can move on.

2:42:44 Do we need to remove the statutes that are on there?

2:42:50 Is that a technical change?

2:42:51 I think I’ve asked that question before.

2:42:52 Oh, look.

2:42:53 Paul.

2:42:54 If it’s not needed, Paul, you can get rid of them.

2:42:57 Yeah.

2:42:58 I mean, I mean, is there any harm in citing a statute that

2:43:02 literally pertains nothing to this policy?

2:43:05 It’s just misleading.

2:43:06 So if I can get rid of it technically, I’ll do it.

2:43:09 If not, I’ll leave it until we get an update.

2:43:12 Neola updates it and says they don’t need it.

2:43:14 So we can get rid of it.

2:43:15 The third statute is relevant.

2:43:17 It’s just the one about the commissioner.

2:43:19 Right.

2:43:20 Yeah.

2:43:21 Different.

2:43:22 Yeah.

2:43:23 All right.

2:43:24 The board directs curriculum to this district.

2:43:26 Right.

2:43:27 One, two, two, one, zero.

2:43:29 Are we good?

2:43:30 So leave that one as is.

2:43:32 Yeah.

2:43:33 The one we were just on.

2:43:34 Yes.

2:43:35 We are on two, two, one, zero curriculum development.

2:43:37 It’s pretty.

2:43:38 If you look at this, it’s pretty.

2:43:39 The only difference we would do is, is a superintendent may make

2:43:42 progress reports to the board periodically

2:43:44 or annually.

2:43:45 I think we’ve chosen periodically and then.

2:43:50 There’s requirements in here from updated state statute.

2:43:53 I believe in order to report back to the Florida Department of

2:43:55 Education.

2:43:56 Sure.

2:43:57 Yeah.

2:43:58 This one was updated in 2022.

2:43:59 So I’m going to assume that some of that is.

2:44:03 For the most part, all of the language is pretty much the same

2:44:07 except for those updates.

2:44:09 Yeah.

2:44:10 So we need to update this so that we have the updated

2:44:11 requirements.

2:44:12 Yep.

2:44:13 Is there any reason that we picked periodically as opposed to

2:44:15 annually?

2:44:16 Because it’s more frequent.

2:44:17 More frequent?

2:44:18 I mean.

2:44:19 Progress reports as far as curriculum development?

2:44:22 If you guys want to put annually or periodically, it doesn’t

2:44:27 matter to me.

2:44:28 Yeah.

2:44:29 It doesn’t mean it’s less than annually.

2:44:31 It’s one of those words that’s subject to interpretation, like

2:44:34 ongoing, which you’re

2:44:35 like, well, annually could be ongoing or every two years could

2:44:38 be ongoing.

2:44:39 Yeah.

2:44:40 I mean, we’ve been getting them twice a year specifically, just

2:44:43 not curriculum updates,

2:44:44 but academic achievement updates and all those things at least

2:44:47 twice a year.

2:44:48 So then do we want to put that so that it reflects what we would

2:44:53 like to see?

2:44:54 Yeah.

2:44:55 I mean, if you want to, I mean, I don’t want to go back to the RISES

2:44:59 policy for only changing

2:44:59 that one phrase, but if we want to change it at least annually,

2:45:04 you know, or whatever,

2:45:06 you know, I mean, it’s, I mean, I’m not going to.

2:45:08 What do you guys want?

2:45:09 I’m getting a roll over that.

2:45:10 We’ve got to change the whole thing anyway.

2:45:12 It’s got to come before us.

2:45:13 So if you want to add a couple of words, it’s okay.

2:45:15 What are we changing the rest of it?

2:45:16 Because that’s the only thing I really, I mean, it looks like

2:45:21 the rest of it all.

2:45:23 Where was the reporting thing that you?

2:45:25 It’s on the bottom of the first page where, are you talking

2:45:28 about that where it says,

2:45:30 where we select if we would like it annually or periodically?

2:45:36 I’m okay with annually or periodically or at least in front of,

2:45:40 and then check annually.

2:45:41 It doesn’t matter to me.

2:45:43 I think we’re focusing on semantics too much.

2:45:46 I think the word periodically leaves it open.

2:45:48 The board’s in charge of the superintendent.

2:45:49 If you don’t like that they’re not reporting something to you

2:45:51 enough, you can tell them to report it.

2:45:53 Yep.

2:45:54 Yeah.

2:45:55 I’m not seeing that you were talking about a change earlier

2:45:56 about reporting.

2:45:57 Oh, no, I see it.

2:45:58 I see that the first one on the second page annually a date

2:46:01 determined by the FDOE.

2:46:02 Yeah.

2:46:03 District shall submit a board approved K-12 comprehensive

2:46:05 reading plan to the department for this specific use.

2:46:07 I think that’s new statute.

2:46:08 Yeah.

2:46:09 Okay.

2:46:10 Based upon a root cause analysis.

2:46:11 We’re good.

2:46:12 That’s the change.

2:46:13 Yep.

2:46:14 We’re good to say we will take the NEOLA update and check

2:46:18 annually.

2:46:19 Is that what we want to do?

2:46:20 Well, I think we need a consensus.

2:46:22 So it doesn’t, I mean, whatever everyone wants.

2:46:24 To me periodically means more often or gives room for more often.

2:46:28 Yeah.

2:46:29 So I think, yeah, I think periodically is better than annually.

2:46:32 You okay with that?

2:46:33 I’m fine with it.

2:46:34 Okay.

2:46:35 Moving on from 2210.

2:46:36 We’re going to take the NEOLA update onto 22.

2:46:39 Hang on.

2:46:40 Let me make sure there’s nothing in between there.

2:46:42 Yep.

2:46:43 2215.

2:46:44 So this one we have updates on.

2:46:47 Yep.

2:46:48 Have you guys had a chance to look at the two options?

2:47:01 There’s only one option.

2:47:04 No, there’s two different options within the one version.

2:47:09 Oh, oh, oh, oh.

2:47:10 Yeah.

2:47:11 I’m sorry.

2:47:12 I didn’t clarify.

2:47:13 Yep.

2:47:14 This policy is actually going to be revised with new legislation

2:47:19 that’s passing.

2:47:19 It certainly is.

2:47:20 Yeah.

2:47:21 Do you want to pause on this until we get it?

2:47:24 Well, I think.

2:47:25 Because we’re just going to have to redo it anyway.

2:47:26 You’re going to have to redo it.

2:47:27 Yeah.

2:47:28 Tons of this is going to end up being changed after this session.

2:47:30 Paul, are you okay with that?

2:47:31 Yep.

2:47:31 Take this one.

2:47:32 Pause it and bring it back.

2:47:33 All right.

2:47:34 Great point, guys.

2:47:35 Moving through these.

2:47:37 All right.

2:47:38 So we’re next is 2216.

2:47:41 They have gifted education.

2:47:46 Looks like we made our own.

2:47:47 And Neola has nothing.

2:47:48 This is a first.

2:47:49 And we did.

2:47:50 And I looked through it.

2:47:51 Extensive work on this.

2:47:52 And I looked at it.

2:47:53 And I said, this is great.

2:47:54 This might be the longest policy we have.

2:47:57 And we created it on our own.

2:47:58 No, it’s not.

2:47:59 The financial policy that Cindy brought us a couple years ago is

2:48:02 the longest policy that

2:48:03 we have.

2:48:04 I haven’t actually looked.

2:48:05 But I remember.

2:48:06 You remember, Cindy, when we did that?

2:48:07 It was.

2:48:08 It’s very long.

2:48:09 It’s even longer than charter school policy.

2:48:10 We’ll get there.

2:48:11 Yeah.

2:48:12 So are we okay?

2:48:13 I looked through it.

2:48:14 Are you okay with that?

2:48:15 Yeah.

2:48:16 No, I don’t have this one marked up at all.

2:48:17 So I’ll just give you.

2:48:18 I mean, one of the things that we did in that was to screen, one,

2:48:21 we’re screening all kids

2:48:23 in second grade.

2:48:24 So you kind of remove that.

2:48:25 You know, either the parent had to say, I think my kid’s gifted,

2:48:28 or the teacher had to

2:48:29 say, we’re doing that initial screening for everybody in the

2:48:31 second grade.

2:48:32 And just trying to open that up and make it a little more

2:48:34 equitable.

2:48:35 But we did a lot of work on that.

2:48:37 I’m not saying I’m not willing to do a lot of work again.

2:48:39 But I think we have a good one there.

2:48:42 Yeah.

2:48:43 All right.

2:48:44 We’re good.

2:48:45 All right.

2:48:46 Moving on.

2:48:47 22-20.

2:48:48 Adoption of courses of study.

2:48:51 They haven’t changed anything since 2002.

2:48:56 Is there anything in here regarding financial literacy and the

2:49:00 implementation of that?

2:49:02 Let me look.

2:49:03 Sorry.

2:49:04 I don’t know that it gets specific to the actual courses of

2:49:10 study.

2:49:11 Okay.

2:49:12 Right, right.

2:49:13 Yeah.

2:49:14 It just talks about what’s required within them and for them to

2:49:18 be presented.

2:49:19 Right, right.

2:49:20 Okay.

2:49:21 If we’re going to do something new, it has to have all these

2:49:23 things.

2:49:24 Okay.

2:49:25 We’re okay?

2:49:26 Yeah.

2:49:27 It’s exactly the same, right?

2:49:28 Yep.

2:49:29 Okay.

2:49:30 I’ll show it.

2:49:31 Updated.

2:49:32 22-30 on this one.

2:49:34 Is there something on the old one?

2:49:36 Nope.

2:49:37 There we go.

2:49:38 Course guides.

2:49:39 All right.

2:49:40 22-30 course guides.

2:49:41 Oh, wait.

2:49:42 That’s right.

2:49:43 Does that be in line with almost identical to what it was?

2:49:44 It’s like this is different than normal.

2:49:46 I know, but like – I know I’m trying to like –

2:49:50 It adds H.

2:49:51 So –

2:49:52 Usually it’s spread out.

2:49:53 Yeah.

2:49:54 So when you look at the bottom section of it, we don’t have

2:49:57 anything selected there for

2:49:59 the – all right.

2:50:00 So it says the superintendent shall be responsible for the

2:50:03 preparation.

2:50:04 Of course, guides and may establish administrative procedures

2:50:07 related to the preparation.

2:50:08 But then it looks like we should have selected one of those two

2:50:12 options, right?

2:50:14 Or both.

2:50:15 I don’t think it’s a have to.

2:50:17 They would have told us if we had to.

2:50:18 Where are you?

2:50:19 At the bottom.

2:50:21 The bottom, where there’s a check.

2:50:22 Do you have to be responsible for the preparation of course

2:50:24 guides of the –

2:50:24 All new course guides and the existing guides shall be submitted

2:50:27 to the board for approval.

2:50:29 I like that.

2:50:30 We’re still there.

2:50:31 I thought we left that.

2:50:32 Before they are implemented.

2:50:33 Yeah.

2:50:34 Sorry.

2:50:35 I thought we moved on.

2:50:36 I think both of them.

2:50:37 I can’t see a disadvantage of having all of those in the policy.

2:50:40 I agree.

2:50:41 Do we – have we done that before?

2:50:43 Course guides submit to this – to the board for approval?

2:50:48 No?

2:50:49 They’re all online.

2:50:50 Yeah.

2:50:51 They’re all online.

2:50:52 Yeah.

2:50:53 That’s why it’s not checked.

2:50:54 I think it should be added to the policy for the board to review

2:50:55 it.

2:50:55 Gene?

2:50:56 Yep.

2:50:57 Okay.

2:50:58 How about you guys?

2:50:59 Any objections to adding it?

2:51:00 Red flags?

2:51:01 No?

2:51:02 Okay.

2:51:03 Does that mean we need to go back and –

2:51:04 approve all of the course guides that we have?

2:51:05 No.

2:51:06 It says new.

2:51:07 It says new –

2:51:08 It says all new course guides.

2:51:09 And revisions of existing.

2:51:10 So yeah.

2:51:11 If they’re all online, I guess we don’t need to keep them in a

2:51:11 file in the office of the

2:51:11 Yeah, that’s really outdated.

2:51:12 It’s definitely 2002.

2:51:13 That’s very outdated.

2:51:14 Oh, come on.

2:51:15 We can – I mean, I’m a paper girl.

2:51:16 I like to have things that I can flip through and write on and

2:51:17 make notes, but –

2:51:17 People can go online and print them out.

2:51:18 Yeah.

2:51:19 But what if the end of the course guides didn’t work?

2:51:20 No.

2:51:21 Okay.

2:51:22 That’s right.

2:51:23 Okay.

2:51:26 Does that mean we need to go back and approve all of the course

2:51:28 guides that we have?

2:51:28 No.

2:51:29 It says new.

2:51:31 It says all new course guides.

2:51:32 And revisions of existing.

2:51:33 So yeah.

2:51:34 If they’re all online, I guess we don’t need to keep them in a

2:51:35 file in the office –

2:51:35 Yeah.

2:51:36 That’s really outdated.

2:51:37 It’s definitely 2002.

2:51:38 That’s very outdated.

2:51:39 Oh, come on.

2:51:40 We can –

2:51:41 I mean, I’m a paper girl.

2:51:42 We can go online and print them out.

2:51:43 Yeah.

2:51:44 But what if the internet fails?

2:51:46 Oh.

2:51:47 Don’t, don’t.

2:51:48 Don’t.

2:51:49 All right.

2:51:50 So check the first one in its –

2:51:51 Before they are implemented.

2:51:54 Get rid of the copies on all current course guides.

2:51:56 We’re good to go?

2:51:57 Hold on.

2:51:58 I’m just – I don’t know about the before they’re implemented

2:52:00 thing because that is

2:52:01 going to pose a barrier very likely in terms of timing of

2:52:04 meetings and things that

2:52:05 have to get rolling and the last-minute changes that often our

2:52:08 state makes.

2:52:08 As they walk to the podium, I think they’re going to say all of

2:52:11 that.

2:52:11 Well, sort of.

2:52:12 Yeah.

2:52:13 All the curriculum guides are online.

2:52:14 We review them every single summer and make adaptive changes

2:52:22 based on changes of state statute,

2:52:26 course code guides, things like that.

2:52:28 Super transparent.

2:52:29 More than happy to put them in front of the board.

2:52:32 Timing in terms of before implemented might be a little

2:52:36 difficult.

2:52:37 They basically get redone every summer and then rolled out –

2:52:42 redone minor changes.

2:52:43 But it would fall under that language.

2:52:45 We’d certainly put them on a board agenda.

2:52:48 It’s not a problem.

2:52:49 But it might be difficult to say before they’re used because

2:52:53 they’re a resource for our teachers.

2:52:54 So would there be anything that would stop you from just, I

2:52:58 guess, putting them in front of the board during the summer

2:53:01 meeting for us to review them?

2:53:03 And then if there were any issues with them, I don’t suspect

2:53:06 there would be.

2:53:07 We also get teacher input to what they want changed.

2:53:12 For example, the ELA, the pacing curriculum guides, those are

2:53:17 all going to be some revisions this summer again.

2:53:20 Right.

2:53:21 So the timing is the issue because we will finish them the last

2:53:27 – middle of July for August.

2:53:30 So – but absolutely, we’ll bring them to you.

2:53:33 But –

2:53:34 Under consent, are we imagining just the process?

2:53:37 I think putting the before implementation piece puts a really

2:53:42 big barrier and burden on our staff.

2:53:44 And it takes the fluidity out of a very fluid, active document

2:53:47 that should naturally have revisions when things aren’t going

2:53:50 well or do need to be changed because they’re mandated.

2:53:54 But it doesn’t stop it from coming before us whenever most

2:53:58 likely available right after.

2:54:00 I don’t – I think that’s a burden that we’re going to put on

2:54:03 our staff for no reason.

2:54:04 And I guess the only reason I have pause about this again is

2:54:06 because of us being responsible for all curriculum that, you

2:54:10 know, statutorily we are.

2:54:11 So I would like to review it and if there is an issue.

2:54:14 Absolutely.

2:54:15 No problem.

2:54:16 All right.

2:54:17 Thank you.

2:54:18 We’ll get them to you.

2:54:19 You can even just send me an e-mail and –

2:54:21 Well, I think –

2:54:22 We don’t mind at all.

2:54:23 Yeah.

2:54:24 We actually like that it’s public and clear.

2:54:26 Yeah.

2:54:27 We direct a lot of families to the site.

2:54:28 It’s not a problem at all.

2:54:29 Ms. Hand has this meeting twice a week for the rest of the year.

2:54:32 So we’ll be fine.

2:54:33 Plenty of opportunities to bring it forward.

2:54:34 The rest of the year.

2:54:35 Twice a week.

2:54:36 Wait.

2:54:38 Wait a minute.

2:54:39 There you go.

2:54:40 So maybe it would be helpful.

2:54:42 I think it would be helpful to me.

2:54:44 When we’re talking about these course guides, are we talking

2:54:47 about what you shared, Ms. Klein,

2:54:50 about the – like the pacing guide?

2:54:52 Are we talking about a pacing guide?

2:54:53 Are we talking about we’re going to have a new course – I mean,

2:54:59 it doesn’t say course of study.

2:55:00 But I mean – well, it does say course of study.

2:55:03 But are we talking – like if we’re going to have a new class

2:55:07 offered that you’re – I don’t know that I – I don’t know that

2:55:10 the board really wants to see you adjusted the pacing guide

2:55:12 because it was going too fast.

2:55:13 I – I – I don’t think we need to approve that.

2:55:17 Or we had some events so we need to slow it down.

2:55:20 I don’t know that that’s what this policy is asking.

2:55:25 So I mean – but – so I – I think we need to get it – get

2:55:28 down to what is the – that the board wants to see before it

2:55:32 gets started.

2:55:32 And what way do we want to see it?

2:55:34 Do we want it have to come before a meeting and we’re going to

2:55:36 approve it?

2:55:37 Or do we’re just saying – are we just saying make us aware?

2:55:40 I – I would say it says board for approval.

2:55:42 And then when you’re looking at course guides, what do you –

2:55:45 what do you – what is that envision in your mind?

2:55:47 I know it’s not the pacing guide.

2:55:48 So they’re a little different.

2:55:49 So if you went to our social studies webpage, you would see a

2:55:52 link for each of the courses.

2:55:54 So civics, U.S. history, economics.

2:55:57 You would see some curriculum resources, some guides and pacing,

2:56:01 some ancillary supports to ways to address diverse learners.

2:56:06 Like our students with disabilities, how to modify the

2:56:08 curriculum.

2:56:09 Just see all kinds of things in a math.

2:56:12 You’re going to see a lot more pacing just because that’s

2:56:15 inherently math.

2:56:16 In ELA, you’re going to see our specialists have pulled and add

2:56:21 depth to what’s in the curriculum.

2:56:24 So they’re all a little different depending on the course.

2:56:28 Super easy for us to link to all of that if that is sufficient

2:56:33 in a board agenda.

2:56:34 And we can, you know, put a little new or, you know, updated or

2:56:39 not updated next to it or something like that.

2:56:41 Really like our public viewing them, giving feedback on them.

2:56:44 So it’s not a problem at all.

2:56:46 It just – the problem will be the language on the prior to

2:56:50 implementation.

2:56:51 Given it’s mostly just supplemental content or sequenced content.

2:56:58 Honestly, it’s a little easier to put them all.

2:57:01 Okay, so –

2:57:02 We can get to yes anywhere.

2:57:04 My one pause would be, it may not perfectly be before school

2:57:08 starts from when they finish to when we can give you guys an

2:57:11 update.

2:57:12 But I don’t see why by not early August.

2:57:14 And the other layer of that is, is that they’re not going to

2:57:17 teach the entire course on the first day.

2:57:19 So you see what I mean?

2:57:21 So like, whereas we’re saying before you start, well, if you

2:57:24 know, the first week and a half is just basically finding the

2:57:26 bathroom and telling them how to write their names at the top of

2:57:29 the paper half the time.

2:57:29 Right?

2:57:30 So I think we’re in a good place if we can get to there.

2:57:32 Not my class.

2:57:33 Maybe your class.

2:57:34 Not my class.

2:57:35 Ms. Campbell.

2:57:36 Ms. Campbell, like seriously, like let’s just talk about the

2:57:39 first week of school.

2:57:39 And again, their guides.

2:57:40 Their guides for teachers and some are used much more closely,

2:57:43 particularly our new teachers, others less.

2:57:45 Our veteran teachers are less dependent on those guides.

2:57:48 We ask them to review them for mandatory content.

2:57:51 There’s a lot of mandatory content in our state, so.

2:57:54 So I guess, I mean, I’m okay with removing the before they are

2:57:57 implemented.

2:57:58 If they go on the agenda, then at least honestly, that will help

2:58:02 with our public engagement to seeing these changes and revisions.

2:58:05 So I think that that’s a win-win all the way around.

2:58:07 Yeah.

2:58:08 We agree.

2:58:09 What do you guys think?

2:58:10 Sounds good to me.

2:58:11 Yeah.

2:58:12 To not put the before.

2:58:13 Before they’re implemented.

2:58:14 Yeah.

2:58:15 That’d be helpful.

2:58:16 For us to be able to review it.

2:58:17 Yeah.

2:58:18 Because I think it’s contradictory too, by putting the

2:58:19 implemented, because ultimately this is the role and

2:58:19 responsibility of the superintendent.

2:58:20 Adding the first checkmark is just putting another eye on it.

2:58:25 But if we put the implemented, I think it’s taking the

2:58:28 responsibility away from the superintendent.

2:58:30 Well, I think it’s giving us.

2:58:33 Okay.

2:58:34 Moving on.

2:58:35 Paul, do you have direction?

2:58:36 Yep.

2:58:37 All right.

2:58:38 Moving on.

2:58:39 22.

2:58:40 Hang on a second.

2:58:41 I’m going to make sure.

2:58:43 2240.

2:58:44 Controversial issues.

2:58:45 Yes.

2:58:46 All right.

2:58:47 Here we go.

2:58:48 It’s actually not a very good question.

2:58:49 I know.

2:58:50 It’s really not a very controversial policy.

2:58:51 I know.

2:58:53 It’s really not.

2:58:54 It’s for kids.

2:58:55 It’s pretty benign.

2:58:56 I know.

2:58:57 Actually, so every year I teach at the Teacher Leadership

2:59:01 Academy.

2:59:02 Linda Buffum has invited me to do that.

2:59:04 I just did it last week.

2:59:05 And this is a policy I used to give them as an example.

2:59:10 But it’s pretty tame.

2:59:11 And Neola hasn’t updated theirs since 2002.

2:59:11 I think this is also going to be one that’s going to change with

2:59:21 – my computer’s logging

2:59:24 me out for some reason.

2:59:25 Sorry.

2:59:26 Legislation to some degree.

2:59:27 This – ours is actually – am I on the right one?

2:59:29 Ours is longer.

2:59:30 It’s just broken up.

2:59:31 Is it just the formatting?

2:59:32 It’s just making it – it’s making it very clear and separate

2:59:40 that parents can have concerns

2:59:43 and communicate that with staff.

2:59:44 Yep.

2:59:45 Yeah.

2:59:46 So are we okay with just telling Paul, hey, listen, anything

2:59:48 that’s not inside there from

2:59:49 the first Neola – or from the Neola update, but we keep our

2:59:54 policy here?

2:59:55 Yeah.

2:59:56 I don’t – our policy is actually stronger than the Neola’s

2:59:58 policy.

2:59:58 Yep.

2:59:59 If that’s okay.

3:00:00 And then in the event that something happens that updates it, it’ll

3:00:02 come forward to us with

3:00:03 other ones.

3:00:04 Yeah.

3:00:05 We’re good with that, Paul?

3:00:06 This one’s also been done in the last five years.

3:00:08 Yep.

3:00:09 Ms. Campbell, you’re excited to find those ones that have been

3:00:11

3:00:11 I was just going to say, like –

3:00:12 It’s good to do them now, though, so we don’t have to go through

3:00:15 this.

3:00:16 I counted.

3:00:17 There’s 23.

3:00:18 I’m like, there’s 23.

3:00:19 Okay.

3:00:21 So –

3:00:22 We do not have a 2250.

3:00:23 All right.

3:00:24 So we’re good.

3:00:25 2250.

3:00:26 Innovative program.

3:00:27 You mean to tell me we don’t have it?

3:00:28 We do not.

3:00:29 We have many innovative programs.

3:00:31 Unless it’s somewhere else.

3:00:32 Right.

3:00:33 I truly believe we don’t need this when I was looking at it.

3:00:38 You know, it basically puts handcuffs on – any innovative

3:00:42 program has to put all of these

3:00:43 things together, in-service requirements, assessment – it’s

3:00:46 just – it’s not needed.

3:00:48 We okay with that?

3:00:49 Yep.

3:00:51 All right.

3:00:52 Moving on.

3:00:53 2260.

3:00:54 I think our policy looks significantly different than Neil, as I

3:00:57 wrote.

3:00:57 So I need to look at – this is the trouble with looking at

3:01:02 these two months ago.

3:01:04 Because now I’m like, I don’t remember.

3:01:06 All right.

3:01:07 We just updated this one last year.

3:01:08 Oops.

3:01:09 One page.

3:01:10 You know how many trees, Tammy, saved by printing them in size

3:01:15 four font?

3:01:16 It was just so this didn’t look quite so bad when you’re like,

3:01:23 oh.

3:01:23 All right.

3:01:24 So.

3:01:26 I think this is one that we can do is add anything that Neola

3:01:32 suggests and keep any of the stuff

3:01:36 that we have, if you guys are feeling comfortable with that.

3:01:38 There’s lots of options.

3:01:39 Yeah.

3:01:40 I mean, like the – what was this?

3:01:41 So our policy like kind of picks up towards the middle of page

3:01:44 two or something.

3:01:45 It’s like – it’s like we missed the whole first page or

3:01:49 something.

3:01:50 if you guys are feeling comfortable with that.

3:01:51 There’s lots of options.

3:01:53 Yeah.

3:01:54 I mean, like the, what was this?

3:01:56 So our policy, like, kind of picks up towards the middle of page

3:02:02 two or something.

3:02:03 It’s like we missed the whole first page.

3:02:06 All right.

3:02:12 Anyone?

3:02:12 Reward does not.

3:02:15 All right.

3:02:19 So again, this is something that clearly has been updated

3:02:29 by the legislation changing last session.

3:02:34 I don’t see the oppressive comment.

3:02:40 Oppressive.

3:02:44 Hold on.

3:02:45 Give me a second.

3:02:49 Ours.

3:02:50 Right.

3:02:52 Which I think is new.

3:02:54 This is what I’m getting on.

3:02:55 Gosh.

3:02:56 It looks like we took the first paragraph

3:02:58 and then we opted for the second option on this one.

3:03:02 Mm-hmm.

3:03:03 Yeah.

3:03:13 Any suggestions?

3:03:14 Give me a minute.

3:03:23 Sorry, this one’s a long one.

3:03:25 This is an 11-pager.

3:03:26 We found a longer policy.

3:03:27 All right.

3:03:29 Paul, do you want to make any suggestions to us on that Neola

3:03:37 policy?

3:03:38 Mm-hmm.

3:03:39 I can go through and scan for anything that’s been added since

3:03:43 we did and added into ours.

3:03:44 that we don’t have.

3:04:00 Is that okay with you guys?

3:04:01 Yeah.

3:04:02 When I was looking through it, it pretty much just follows.

3:04:06 Yeah.

3:04:06 Are you okay with that, Ms. Campbell?

3:04:10 Bring it back to us?

3:04:12 Sure.

3:04:14 Okay, Mr. Trent, we’re good?

3:04:16 Yeah, I’m good with that.

3:04:17 Okay.

3:04:17 Moving on.

3:04:19 22.

3:04:21 Let’s see what the next one is.

3:04:24 Make sure I don’t miss one here.

3:04:27 2260-001.

3:04:30 All right, this is.

3:04:31 All right, so there seems to be this ADA thing.

3:04:36 Well, this looks like a.

3:04:39 Ours has appeal process procedures.

3:04:44 What are you looking at?

3:04:47 We’re at 2260.01.

3:04:48 Our policy is different than theirs.

3:04:49 Oh, yeah.

3:04:49 Ours is not about 504.

3:04:50 Is that you?

3:04:51 Facilities.

3:04:51 Yeah.

3:04:51 This is a part of a whole package that we did together last year

3:04:54 on anti-harassment and non-discrimination.

3:05:10 We did a whole group of policies kind of all at the same time.

3:05:14 So do we need to, I mean, it looks like we obviously need to add

3:05:22 this 2260.01 to match what theirs is and maybe renumber ours.

3:05:30 I’m trying to see if this is maybe in the future.

3:05:33 So I don’t, I don’t see.

3:05:34 Is this the same thing as the other one?

3:05:36 Is this the other one?

3:05:37 No.

3:05:38 So my gut feeling is 2260.01 from NEOLA is law.

3:05:43 Is wrong?

3:05:44 No, it’s law.

3:05:45 I mean, it’s not.

3:05:46 I don’t think we need a policy on it.

3:05:47 Yeah, yeah.

3:05:48 No, it looks very much like law.

3:05:49 Yeah.

3:05:50 But ours looks a lot, this looks a lot like law too.

3:05:52 So the anti-harassment and non-discrimination appeal procedures.

3:05:56 Yeah, I’m sure it is.

3:05:58 But the numbers for sure need to be fixed.

3:06:01 Okay.

3:06:02 So should we add in NEOLA’s 2260.01 and then change the number

3:06:10 of ours to .02?

3:06:11 Well, I think NEOLA has a .02 as well and a .03.

3:06:15 Say what?

3:06:16 No, that’s 61.

3:06:18 Never mind.

3:06:19 You’re looking, I’m saying 2260.02.

3:06:20 Yeah.

3:06:21 Makes sense.

3:06:22 Yeah, we can get them to renumber ours to be 02.

3:06:25 Okay.

3:06:26 And then add in there 2260.01 because we do not have, I mean,

3:06:35 there’s actually parts of this

3:06:36 that are in our 2260.01.

3:06:39 Go with your direction.

3:06:40 You got the gap open here.

3:06:41 I’m going to go use the direction real quick.

3:06:42 Okay.

3:06:43 Let’s do the next one.

3:06:46 Uh-huh.

3:06:52 What’s the thoughts of the board?

3:06:54 So the, the compliance officers haven’t, this is, is this just

3:06:58 504s?

3:06:59 Mm-hmm.

3:07:00 This is all federal stuff.

3:07:02 So we, we do it.

3:07:03 I was trying to see if we had one somewhere else.

3:07:05 Yeah.

3:07:07 The compliance officer.

3:07:08 Right.

3:07:09 Okay.

3:07:10 Specifically four 504s?

3:07:11 Yeah.

3:07:12 And it talks about you’re having to name them and everything and

3:07:16 we do that.

3:07:17 So.

3:07:18 Do we have a separate male one and a female one?

3:07:20 I saw that somewhere in there.

3:07:21 I’m not sure what the point of that is.

3:07:23 Well, depending on the event that took place and you may want.

3:07:30 Oh.

3:07:31 You know.

3:07:32 Yeah.

3:07:34 So we need to look at this.

3:07:41 Yeah.

3:07:42 We, I’m not seeing anything just in a cursory glance that we

3:07:48 have.

3:07:49 We don’t have any policies labeled 504.

3:07:52 We have lots of policies that talk about 504.

3:07:54 But adopt their 2260.01 and then rename ours.

3:07:58 I think we’re probably going to run into ours somewhere else.

3:08:01 Oh.

3:08:02 Because ours, this is just the appeal procedures.

3:08:04 Yeah.

3:08:05 Ours is the appeal procedures.

3:08:06 Theirs is.

3:08:07 For the policy report.

3:08:08 Yeah.

3:08:09 Yes.

3:08:10 Yeah.

3:08:12 So what do you guys think?

3:08:13 Yeah.

3:08:14 I’m fine with that.

3:08:15 Ms. Jenkins.

3:08:16 Yeah, that’s fine.

3:08:17 I just, I feel like we have it somewhere, but.

3:08:21 Mr. Trent.

3:08:26 Okay.

3:08:27 Yeah.

3:08:28 Okay.

3:08:29 Does our, does our, is there so much of a separate process, Paul,

3:08:34 that, that what we have

3:08:36 in 2260 will not cover?

3:08:40 Because this is still about discrimination.

3:08:42 Right.

3:08:43 I haven’t done a line item.

3:08:44 There might be things in as required by federal.

3:08:47 Yeah.

3:08:48 I mean, this does, because this speaks specifically to somebody

3:08:50 with a disability.

3:08:50 Look at paragraph number two of this 2260.01.

3:08:53 Right.

3:08:54 There’s probably a lot of overlap in how we handle it.

3:08:57 Okay.

3:09:00 So moving on.

3:09:03 Where are we at?

3:09:04 Are we good?

3:09:05 2261.

3:09:06 I think we got three of that.

3:09:07 We’re going to rename this one.

3:09:08 We’re at 2261.

3:09:09 All right.

3:09:10 2261.

3:09:11 If you go to the top of it, title one services.

3:09:16 When I looked at it, I didn’t see anything that was concerning.

3:09:23 It seems like we had pretty much all of the options there.

3:09:26 If everybody’s okay with it.

3:09:29 I didn’t see.

3:09:30 The only thing I didn’t see on there was the F portion, which is

3:09:34 in ours.

3:09:35 Some simultaneous services.

3:09:37 That’s a lot.

3:09:38 If you guys are okay with Paul updating it to include anything

3:09:42 that may not be in there that we currently have.

3:09:44 Because if you look down at F.

3:09:46 Yeah.

3:09:47 Okay.

3:09:48 So if you guys are okay with that, we can move on.

3:09:51 Yeah.

3:09:52 Were you saying F?

3:09:53 Oh, ours.

3:09:54 On our policy.

3:09:55 We have simultaneous services.

3:09:57 If that’s okay.

3:09:58 Yeah.

3:09:59 And we, there’s actually, there’s something in under, I don’t

3:10:03 know.

3:10:03 It’s absolutely necessary, but under participation there, there’s,

3:10:07 they’ve got a couple extra things in there.

3:10:09 Okay.

3:10:10 So update this one to match NEOLA’s then and still keep our

3:10:14 simultaneous services.

3:10:16 Or at least have staff take a look at it.

3:10:18 Yeah.

3:10:19 Okay.

3:10:20 Good.

3:10:21 All right.

3:10:22 226101, parent participation.

3:10:25 And because we had this conversation where there were only a few

3:10:29 staff members in the room,

3:10:30 even though they were probably watching from their offices.

3:10:32 I just to clarify, because it looks like we’re dumping a whole

3:10:35 bunch of policies.

3:10:36 I believe the direction of the board is as we can get to it.

3:10:40 If there’s some that we come, like we did with the remote work

3:10:44 and say, we need to do this.

3:10:45 We need to do this now.

3:10:46 But everything else is as we, because we, you know, it’s not

3:10:49 like you guys aren’t working on anything else.

3:10:50 Yeah.

3:10:51 All right.

3:10:52 So parent participation in Title I programs is what is.

3:10:57 This is a good, if you guys read it, it’s really good.

3:10:59 Yeah.

3:11:00 It talks about the development of all those other things.

3:11:02 We, I wanted to say that there’s been some push to possibly use,

3:11:07 like we can get more parent participation with some of these.

3:11:11 If we were to try to get some sort of like a mobile fingerprinting

3:11:14 to the actual locations.

3:11:15 You know what I mean?

3:11:16 Oh yeah.

3:11:17 That would be tremendous.

3:11:18 You know what I mean?

3:11:19 We have one.

3:11:20 We have, we have two actually.

3:11:21 The problem we have is, is that our staff getting out there and

3:11:24 doing it, you know what I mean?

3:11:25 Right.

3:11:26 Because it only certain people can do it.

3:11:27 Yeah.

3:11:28 So asking.

3:11:29 But we do have, because I asked for them.

3:11:30 We have, we have, but then COVID hit.

3:11:31 They’re like, we literally.

3:11:32 So how do you get those mobile fingerprinting services to your

3:11:35 school?

3:11:35 Because I would love to know.

3:11:36 Quiring minds would love to know.

3:11:38 I’ve sent her an email and they’re looking into it.

3:11:41 We’re looking at it.

3:11:42 Okay.

3:11:43 To be determined.

3:11:44 The problem we had before is district security was having to do

3:11:46 it.

3:11:46 And then it was, they were on a, you know, didn’t have the

3:11:50 availability of many people.

3:11:51 So I think now they’re collaboratively looking at how to do that.

3:11:55 Thank you.

3:11:56 Or even if we were able to just set up a, one in each of our

3:11:58 district, you know, periodically,

3:11:59 that would probably be tremendous as helping some of our

3:12:02 volunteers.

3:12:02 I agree.

3:12:03 We’ll do what we can.

3:12:04 Thank you.

3:12:05 Yes.

3:12:06 I just have to highlight while we have the opportunity is, you

3:12:07 know, one of the ladies

3:12:08 who works in the office who does that is a volunteer for them.

3:12:11 She’s an amazing volunteer.

3:12:13 But our district security office.

3:12:16 The thing is though, is, is that there wasn’t enough.

3:12:19 Like there was a, there was a bandwidth concern.

3:12:21 So I think Ms.

3:12:22 Han is going to put together an effective opportunity for it.

3:12:24 So if you guys are okay, the parent participation in title one

3:12:27 programs, it’s really cool.

3:12:29 I feel okay that if we can pass the updated version that we have

3:12:34 from Neola, it feels pretty

3:12:36 good.

3:12:37 Ours is the same.

3:12:38 Yeah.

3:12:39 It’s the same.

3:12:40 Ours is the same.

3:12:41 Right.

3:12:42 Or whatever.

3:12:43 I mean, it’s a little different.

3:12:44 Yeah.

3:12:45 So if we’re okay with any changes that might be there, if it’s

3:12:48 not identical or just moving

3:12:49 forward, we’re good.

3:12:50 Yeah.

3:12:51 All right.

3:12:53 Next one is 2261.02.

3:12:58 According to Ms. Jenkins, they are identical.

3:13:01 So if everybody’s okay.

3:13:02 We’re good to go.

3:13:03 Mm-hmm.

3:13:04 All right.

3:13:05 Moving on to 2261.0.

3:13:06 Let me make sure we don’t have, yep.

3:13:07 Zero three annual report requirements.

3:13:08 I wrote something on here and I don’t know why I wrote it.

3:13:09 Ours was more extensive.

3:13:10 Yeah.

3:13:15 I like ours.

3:13:16 Yep.

3:13:17 He’s fine.

3:13:18 I don’t know why I wrote that.

3:13:21 Let me make sure we don’t have.

3:13:22 Yep.

3:13:23 Zero three annual report requirements.

3:13:24 I wrote something on here and I don’t know why I wrote it.

3:13:25 Ours was more extensive.

3:13:26 Yeah.

3:13:35 I like ours.

3:13:36 Yeah.

3:13:40 I don’t know why I wrote that.

3:13:41 I would say in this regard, if we can ask Paul to add anything

3:13:46 that Neola has added into

3:13:48 the original policy we have, but we have more that we require

3:13:52 for ours than is required

3:13:54 on that.

3:13:55 Yeah.

3:14:03 Okay.

3:14:04 Mm-hmm.

3:14:05 We’re gay with that.

3:14:06 All right.

3:14:07 Paul, you good?

3:14:08 Yep.

3:14:09 All right.

3:14:10 Moving on.

3:14:11 I think the next one is 2262.

3:14:13 We don’t have latchkey programs.

3:14:14 Hello?

3:14:15 No.

3:14:16 We don’t call it that.

3:14:17 So that’s why we have a version number two, which is, again,

3:14:20 identical.

3:14:20 We call this school-age childcare.

3:14:21 Is that what you mean?

3:14:22 Or what?

3:14:23 What is it?

3:14:24 Version two?

3:14:25 Yeah.

3:14:26 I think latchkey is kind of a –

3:14:27 When I was a child.

3:14:28 Outdated.

3:14:29 Yeah.

3:14:30 That’s what I was growing up.

3:14:31 Child of the ’80s.

3:14:32 Yeah.

3:14:33 Or the ’90s.

3:14:34 And some of our kids.

3:14:35 I was always in the Everglades.

3:14:36 That’s what I grew up.

3:14:37 All right.

3:14:38 So if you look at 2262 version two, looks like –

3:14:43 It’s the same.

3:14:44 Yep.

3:14:45 Yeah.

3:14:46 Yep.

3:14:47 So we’re just going to mark that one reviewed.

3:14:50 Yep.

3:14:51 Next up, 2266, non-discrimination on the basis of sex and

3:15:01 education programs and activity.

3:15:03 This is another one that’s going to be updated with this

3:15:05 legislative session, so –

3:15:06 Yep.

3:15:07 Do you want to pause on this one until it gets updated?

3:15:10 I would say pause on this one, yeah.

3:15:11 Well, I mean, here’s the thing is we – they’ll send us an

3:15:16 update if it needs to be.

3:15:17 Yep.

3:15:18 Right.

3:15:19 Yeah.

3:15:20 I feel confident that we just wait until they update it and then

3:15:23 we get it back.

3:15:24 And the Title IX regs are also being updated right now, so –

3:15:27 Yeah.

3:15:28 They’re going to change again, yeah, with the federal law.

3:15:29 Good.

3:15:30 Needs to be.

3:15:31 Okay.

3:15:32 Then we’re good on that one.

3:15:34 2270 is the next one according to our booklet.

3:15:37 Yep.

3:15:38 Religion in the Curriculum.

3:15:40 There’s some things inside the statute that since this was here

3:15:45 have been updated.

3:15:47 So these are statutory law.

3:15:49 It’s not like I’m trying to add these things to it, but I really

3:15:52 like them.

3:15:53 It talks about the district board shall install – and this was

3:15:59 what was really cool.

3:15:59 The district school board may install the public schools in the

3:16:02 district, a secular program of education, including but not

3:16:05 limited to an objective study of the Bible and of religion.

3:16:08 That’s not in here.

3:16:09 Also, the district school board may provide that a brief period

3:16:12 not to exceed two minutes for the purpose of silent prayer or

3:16:14 mediation be set aside at the start of each school day and each

3:16:18 week.

3:16:18 That’s actually required by state statute that passed.

3:16:21 Yep.

3:16:22 The two minutes, one minute?

3:16:24 Two minutes.

3:16:25 I can’t see from that far away.

3:16:26 Two minutes.

3:16:28 One minute of silence.

3:16:30 Two minutes.

3:16:31 Not to exceed two minutes.

3:16:33 It’s literally statute.

3:16:34 I’m reading it from the statute.

3:16:35 And then what was interesting was is I pulled up another one

3:16:39 that talks from the code law, and it had a couple of other

3:16:43 additions to it that were interesting.

3:16:45 But I think in this regard, religious in the curriculum, if we’re

3:16:50 going to update it to include those things that I just spoke to,

3:16:54 and I think that’s fair.

3:16:59 Anybody else have anything that they want to add to it?

3:17:01 No, I’m in favor of updating this policy, honestly.

3:17:04 So it would have to be our own updates because Neil left.

3:17:10 Yeah, it’s just adding what is inside the statute to the actual

3:17:14 policy.

3:17:15 I’m going to need you to provide that and read that again.

3:17:17 Well, if you’ll go look at 21003.45, you’ll see what I just read

3:17:24 exact.

3:17:25 And all I’m saying is is that we should just add it to the

3:17:30 actual, to the policy.

3:17:32 That’s all.

3:17:33 Yeah.

3:17:34 Okay.

3:17:35 We’re good?

3:17:36 I’m not good.

3:17:37 I didn’t say I was good.

3:17:38 All right.

3:17:39 Well, if you want to look at the statute, I mean, it’s not, it’s

3:17:43 just, it’s law.

3:17:44 So we spoke about this before, about adding certain things to

3:17:48 the actual policy that are law, that are pertinent.

3:17:50 I think this one is one that we could do.

3:17:55 All right.

3:17:57 So all we’re deciding today is if we’re going to update this

3:18:02 policy or not.

3:18:03 We’re not deciding exactly what’s going to go in it and all that.

3:18:06 That’s what you’re asking us.

3:18:08 No, I just, what it is, is we have this one, which is, we have

3:18:12 the update from Neola, right?

3:18:14 2270.

3:18:15 And inside of it, it does not speak to those things that are

3:18:18 inside of the Florida statute, which are related to this.

3:18:21 And it’s referred to.

3:18:22 So what I’m saying is we just add those two components of 1003.45

3:18:27 and that’s it.

3:18:28 Just add it to it.

3:18:29 Yeah.

3:18:30 Okay.

3:18:31 We’re good.

3:18:32 Go ahead and list in there the constitution, the first amendment.

3:18:35 I mean, I don’t, put it all in there as far as I’m concerned.

3:18:39 That one’s implied.

3:18:40 Yeah.

3:18:41 I did click on the link.

3:18:42 I mean, is it actually linking to the whole constitution?

3:18:44 It does.

3:18:45 Not the whole.

3:18:46 It links to amendment.

3:18:47 But it links to it.

3:18:48 It links the first amendment.

3:18:49 Amendment one, first amendment.

3:18:50 Yeah.

3:18:51 All right.

3:18:52 Are we okay with that?

3:18:53 Ms. Jenkins, have you taken a look at it?

3:18:55 Yeah.

3:18:56 You skipped a couple of words, so I wanted to read those.

3:18:59 So thank you.

3:19:00 Okay.

3:19:02 So 2270.

3:19:03 We’re good on that.

3:19:05 Paul, you know the direction on that one?

3:19:07 Yep.

3:19:08 All right.

3:19:09 2271, articulation and access is what our – to college system

3:19:16 institutions.

3:19:17 The secondary enrollment.

3:19:18 Ours is just title.

3:19:19 Yeah.

3:19:20 It’s just whatever.

3:19:21 It’s the same thing.

3:19:22 So I had a question on this one in regards to the second

3:19:25 paragraph where we are approving

3:19:29 participation for students in grades 10, 11, and 12.

3:19:32 And the question of why not add ninth grade if it’s a

3:19:35 possibility for the statute to allow –

3:19:37 Did you hear it?

3:19:38 She’s saying we need to change that.

3:21:04 We need to change that.

3:21:05 She’s saying we need to change that.

3:21:45 And then we need to change that.

3:22:48 We need to change that.

3:22:49 And then we need to change that.

3:23:07 We need to change that.

3:23:08 And then we need to change that.

3:24:29 But then again, you’re right.

3:24:30 Because what they’ll do is they’ll just take it online.

3:24:32 And then we lose that FTE, I guess.

3:24:34 You know what I mean?

3:24:35 Well, not necessarily.

3:24:36 I mean, a lot of times, like, you know, I’ve had my kids take

3:24:39 Hope Online

3:24:39 so they can get another elective in.

3:24:40 Yeah, that’s true, too.

3:24:42 That’s a good point.

3:24:43 Yeah, I think allowing the parents to make that decision.

3:24:46 I think allowing the parents.

3:24:47 I don’t think you need to bog a physician down with needing a

3:24:49 doctor’s note

3:24:49 to not participate in PE.

3:24:51 If a parent says a student’s not able to participate for some

3:24:54 reason,

3:24:54 you should take their word for it and honor that, right?

3:24:57 Yeah, I think so.

3:24:58 Yeah.

3:24:59 Ms. Campbell makes a great point.

3:25:00 So we won’t say student’s physician.

3:25:02 We’ll say student’s parent or guardian.

3:25:04 Yep.

3:25:05 We good with that, Paul?

3:25:06 Yep.

3:25:07 All right.

3:25:14 So these policies get.

3:25:17 All right.

3:25:18 Class size.

3:25:19 2312.

3:25:20 Which.

3:25:21 Do we have a class size policy somewhere else?

3:25:27 We’re regulated by state for class size.

3:25:29 I know, but I’m just.

3:25:30 This is us saying.

3:25:31 I just looked.

3:25:32 We don’t have one that’s specifically says class size.

3:25:35 No.

3:25:36 It says we already do this.

3:25:42 I just don’t know if we’re required to have it in policy.

3:25:45 I think I would stay away from this one.

3:25:48 I would stay away from this one.

3:25:49 Yeah.

3:25:50 Absolutely.

3:25:51 I would stay away from this one.

3:25:52 Yeah.

3:25:53 I think it’s a terrible idea.

3:25:54 Yeah.

3:25:55 I think so too.

3:25:56 It’s unrealistic.

3:25:57 Paul, just make sure that we don’t have to have this thing.

3:25:58 And I think we’re good.

3:25:59 Oh, statue.

3:26:00 Yeah.

3:26:01 I think we’re okay.

3:26:02 Yeah.

3:26:04 I agree with you 100%.

3:26:05 All right.

3:26:06 2330 homework.

3:26:07 Okay.

3:26:08 Oh, yeah.

3:26:09 Here we go.

3:26:11 This is going to be such a good reminder.

3:26:12 I’m excited to talk about it.

3:26:13 She has me come in and teach the last night of the Teacher

3:26:17 Leadership Academy, which I just

3:26:18 did last week.

3:26:19 Fantastic.

3:26:20 And this is the policy I use for a group discussion.

3:26:24 I show them how to find our policies and when we’re updated.

3:26:26 But then I pull this one in and I say, okay, because it’s kind

3:26:29 of short and it’s relevant

3:26:30 to them because they’re all teachers, say, take this policy.

3:26:33 She puts them in breakout rooms and they – I hope they’re

3:26:36 watching this meeting because

3:26:37 one of their assignments is they have to watch the meeting.

3:26:40 Because I told them, I’m going to bring your input to when we

3:26:44 talk about this policy.

3:26:46 I put a break – do a breakout room.

3:26:48 How does this apply to you and your classroom and bring it back?

3:26:50 So there was a lot.

3:26:51 We actually had some good discussions.

3:26:52 So if you don’t mind me taking just a few minutes, I’ll walk you

3:26:55 through.

3:26:55 Yeah.

3:26:56 We’d love to hear it.

3:26:57 So one of the things, you know, the first comment was that it’s

3:26:59 vague.

3:26:59 And I did explain to them, look, a lot of times our policies are

3:27:02 vague purposefully

3:27:03 because then you as the teacher in the classroom can be more

3:27:06 specific.

3:27:07 We’re not prescripting out being – micromanaging how you do

3:27:10 homework.

3:27:11 But they did have this question.

3:27:13 What does recent research say about the effectiveness of

3:27:16 homework?

3:27:16 Is it valuable?

3:27:18 What about kids with little home support?

3:27:21 There was one in letter E.

3:27:24 It said as an evaluation – excuse me – as a valid educational

3:27:30 tool,

3:27:30 homework should be assigned with clear direction and it’s

3:27:33 product carefully evaluated.

3:27:34 They really thought that was important, that the product should

3:27:37 be – that that was a good thing.

3:27:40 That we have a bigger focus on homework in elementary.

3:27:43 And in middle, it’s more about completing their classwork if

3:27:47 they didn’t finish it at home or review.

3:27:49 And that we could maybe use this policy similar to what we –

3:27:53 the request we’ve had on other policies

3:27:54 to differentiate maybe what we say about elementary versus

3:27:58 secondary because, you know, they do function differently.

3:28:01 And so maybe to break down the differences more between

3:28:04 elementary, middle school, high school,

3:28:07 and then we can – where it’s less important for – you know,

3:28:10 parents don’t really have to help, you know.

3:28:13 And the higher up we go, the less some parents may be able to

3:28:18 help.

3:28:19 Even me pulling back those Algebra 1, which I’m doing Algebra 1

3:28:23 for the fourth time now.

3:28:25 So, you know, but anyway, just wanted to make sure I shared that

3:28:29 input when we look at this.

3:28:31 I think that’s great feedback.

3:28:34 I think we should remove the line where it says it should never

3:28:37 be used as a punitive measure

3:28:38 because there are times when kids are acting up in class and

3:28:43 work can’t be done

3:28:44 and homework gets assigned.

3:28:45 And maybe that is not necessarily a punishment, but it is to

3:28:49 some degree.

3:28:50 So I think I would strike that from there.

3:28:52 Yeah, because sometimes that can be a learning purpose.

3:28:54 Yeah, I think the idea there is not – well, I mean, because

3:28:58 obviously if you didn’t finish your homework

3:28:59 and class, your classwork and class, then you’ve got to finish

3:29:01 at home.

3:29:01 But the punitive is like, okay, you guys got in trouble, so you

3:29:05 have to go home tonight and write.

3:29:06 I will not –

3:29:07 I love that.

3:29:08 – da-da-da for a hundred times.

3:29:09 So, I mean, for me, I would say I think it’s something that you

3:29:15 can put

3:29:15 in a teacher’s toolbox to be able to use to possibly help.

3:29:19 Maybe they can earn not coming home.

3:29:21 I wholeheartedly disagree.

3:29:23 Not all of our students are going home to stable families.

3:29:26 Some of them are going to daycare until seven, eight o’clock at

3:29:31 night.

3:29:32 It absolutely should be not – there should never be a negative

3:29:35 connotation intentionally

3:29:36 surrounding your educational experience, intentionally.

3:29:41 There are plenty of other consequences we can assign students.

3:29:44 That is not beneficial.

3:29:45 That will not help them learn more.

3:29:48 That will absolutely not change their behavior.

3:29:50 There is no research to prove that it would.

3:29:52 And it is disproportionately going to affect our students who

3:29:56 are oftentimes

3:29:57 the ones who are struggling the most with attention or behavior.

3:30:00 I don’t think that should be at all taken out.

3:30:05 I think teachers would know the difference if a student is – go

3:30:08 ahead.

3:30:09 No, I’m just saying it’s – in practice, it’s good for it to be

3:30:14 there.

3:30:15 Teachers know how to give that class extra homework and say it’s

3:30:21 not punitive.

3:30:22 That’s fine.

3:30:24 I mean, they’ll get it across that they’re actually just doing

3:30:28 more work.

3:30:29 What are you saying?

3:30:30 Keep the policy the same, but they still just do it without that?

3:30:32 Yeah.

3:30:33 Because, again, for exact reason, you’re going to have people

3:30:36 saying you’re giving math homework because of a punishment.

3:30:38 My son already says that, and it’s not, but I mean – but the

3:30:43 actual intentionally giving it as a punishment, that’s – I don’t

3:30:47 agree.

3:30:47 Right.

3:30:48 So –

3:30:49 The problem is sometimes in the classroom and at homework, the

3:30:52 reason is, is that many teachers give it just because they want

3:30:57 busy work.

3:30:57 And that’s where this homework thing started getting hit with –

3:31:00 we don’t need so much homework at home, right?

3:31:02 But there is some balance to having some work done at home, some

3:31:05 work done in the classroom and stuff like that.

3:31:07 I agree with you.

3:31:08 I mean, I could have done it too.

3:31:09 I mean, you just sort of assign extra work.

3:31:11 So that’s how it works.

3:31:12 So leave it like it is.

3:31:13 Yep.

3:31:14 I lose this one.

3:31:15 That’s okay.

3:31:16 Okay.

3:31:17 22 – 23:30.

3:31:18 We’re moving on to 23:40.

3:31:19 Field trips and other travel.

3:31:20 All right.

3:31:21 We’re getting slapped happy.

3:31:22 We only have 12 minutes, you guys.

3:31:23 We’ll get out of here.

3:31:24 So we only got to go through 35 more policies in 12 minutes, all

3:31:25 right?

3:31:25 Yeah.

3:31:26 I’m kidding.

3:31:27 So, question before we – because we – we were – our next

3:31:37 workshop was May 5th, and that got canceled.

3:31:45 So are we just going to kind of hold these two – one of those

3:31:49 extra Tuesdays we’re putting in there?

3:31:50 Do them tonight.

3:31:52 No, no, no, no, no.

3:31:53 That’s what we said we would do.

3:31:54 We’re on like the 2000s right now.

3:31:56 There’s literally no need to do that.

3:31:57 Hang on, Ms. Jenkins.

3:31:58 Just hang on just a second.

3:31:59 Like, we literally only have a couple more to go.

3:32:00 I’m going to take a point of privilege and tell you that my 14-year-old

3:32:04 is going to be at home tonight by himself until I get home.

3:32:06 And I can anticipate tonight might be a little bit long anyway.

3:32:09 So I would suggest that we’re, again, not in a rush.

3:32:13 We’re doing the process.

3:32:14 We’re going through there.

3:32:15 But this kind of right here, what we’re doing right now, is a

3:32:19 workshop-type feel time.

3:32:20 Let’s take our time.

3:32:21 Let’s not feel rushed.

3:32:23 I strongly would suggest that we have all those Tuesdays that we’ve

3:32:28 specifically set aside to do this work.

3:32:31 I would be more prepared myself to pick up some of these that I

3:32:35 missed.

3:32:36 I do not want to try to rush through to get this done at the end

3:32:41 of a board meeting.

3:32:42 Okay.

3:32:43 So if you guys notice, we said we needed to review the policies,

3:32:48 right?

3:32:48 We’re on two – Ms. Campbell, if you can just let me finish.

3:32:52 So if we are going to complete these, we are now on the 2000s.

3:32:58 We started this process in January, and one of the issues we

3:33:02 have is we always run into these situations.

3:33:04 So what I would propose is we start at 9 o’clock then, and we

3:33:07 get these things banged out during the day.

3:33:09 Because we – at this pace, we will not get these done until –

3:33:12 if we go at this pace, and we started in January,

3:33:15 and now we’re doing them now, what is it, May, and we’re only on

3:33:18 the 2000s, we won’t have them done before Christmas.

3:33:20 And I have an issue with that.

3:33:22 Like, I really do.

3:33:23 So, I mean –

3:33:25 Ms. Campbell: Let’s keep powering through what we’re doing right

3:33:27 now.

3:33:27 I mean, I think we do need to honor Ms. Campbell and the fact

3:33:30 that she is a mother and if she’s a child at home alone,

3:33:32 by all means, we don’t want to keep you from your responsibility

3:33:36 there.

3:33:36 I hear you 100%.

3:33:38 So let’s keep going, and let’s see how far we get for right now.

3:33:42 All right.

3:33:43 We’ve got nine minutes.

3:33:44 Field trips and other student travel.

3:33:47 It is 23:40.

3:33:50 Yeah.

3:33:51 This one needs to be updated.

3:33:52 This one speaks to the fact of an area superintendent approving

3:33:56 all trips within the state for more than two days, which we don’t

3:33:59 – we no longer have area superintendents.

3:34:01 Right.

3:34:02 But the actual policy is reflective of –

3:34:07 Mr. Susan, this is one on our radar that needs to be fixed.

3:34:12 Okay.

3:34:13 So do you want to take this one and fix it and bring it back to

3:34:16 us with the NEOLA updates that pertain to it?

3:34:18 We will work on it.

3:34:19 Beautiful.

3:34:20 There actually aren’t NEOLA updates.

3:34:21 You’re going to bring that back in the next two months?

3:34:23 Yeah.

3:34:24 So we can get all of our policies done?

3:34:26 Of course.

3:34:27 Okay.

3:34:28 Thank you.

3:34:29 All right.

3:34:30 Next up, 2370.

3:34:32 Let’s see here.

3:34:33 Make sure we don’t have 2370 educational options.

3:34:37 I had here just to check the statutes.

3:34:42 This one needs a lot of updating.

3:34:46 Yeah.

3:34:47 Well, if you look at the updates that are on NEOLA, there’s a

3:34:51 couple that are there.

3:34:54 There’s a couple of options that we can choose there at the

3:34:58 bottom.

3:34:58 So if you guys will take – go to 2370 and go down to the bottom

3:35:02 part of the first page, participation,

3:35:04 and then it gives us a couple of options to take a look at.

3:35:14 I think our maximum of credits is a little bit different than

3:35:18 what many other school districts are.

3:35:21 Yeah, they are.

3:35:22 All right.

3:35:23 So, I mean, we award letter grades, and this option one is

3:35:36 talking about that it will be evaluated on pass or fail.

3:35:39 Letter grades shall not be awarded.

3:35:45 This one, I think, I’ll be honest with you guys, there’s some of

3:35:49 these blanks that our district is going to fill in anyway.

3:35:53 What I would like to suggest is to allow them to take a look at

3:35:56 this and come back with it, because they’re going to make those

3:35:59 suggestions based on what our other policies are.

3:36:01 Does that make sense to you?

3:36:02 Yeah.

3:36:03 With the performance being evaluated past, like all of that

3:36:06 needs to go through there.

3:36:07 Are you okay with that, Ms. Campbell, asking staff?

3:36:09 This is one of those that’s kind of – we’re out of our league

3:36:14 here, I think, if that’s okay.

3:36:15 Everybody else good on that?

3:36:16 I’m fine with that.

3:36:17 All right.

3:36:18 2371.

3:36:19 So they have a 2370.01, which is virtual instruction.

3:36:20 We do need that.

3:36:21 And it’s new, but based on the statutory question.

3:36:22 Yeah, we need that.

3:36:23 We need that.

3:36:24 We don’t want to go too fast, though, because that graduation

3:36:24 requirement, that’s already passed, where the online course

3:36:24 requirement has been removed.

3:36:24 So let’s maybe wait until the new packet comes out on this one.

3:36:25 Okay.

3:36:26 Yeah, because we’re moving from that.

3:36:27 We’re moving from that.

3:36:28 Okay.

3:36:29 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:30 Okay.

3:36:31 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:32 Okay.

3:36:33 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:34 Okay.

3:36:35 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:36 Okay.

3:36:37 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:38 Okay.

3:36:39 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:40 Okay.

3:36:41 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:42 Okay.

3:36:43 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:44 Okay.

3:36:45 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:46 Okay.

3:36:47 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:48 Okay.

3:36:49 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:50 Okay.

3:36:51 So we’re moving from that.

3:36:52 Okay.

3:36:53 Yeah, because we’re moving forward with stuff that’s not even in

3:36:56 there anyway.

3:36:56 Okay.

3:36:57 All ready?

3:36:58 We’ll bring that one back.

3:36:59 So, but we don’t – so what – we currently don’t have this

3:37:02 policy.

3:37:02 Right.

3:37:03 So we’re saying –

3:37:04 Wait until – I mean, we can say implement it, plus that checkbox,

3:37:07 because we have a district run one,

3:37:09 until the update, if we need to.

3:37:11 But by the time we literally get it finished through the process,

3:37:14 it’ll be like a month, and then the new ones will come out.

3:37:16 Right.

3:37:17 The new ones will be out.

3:37:18 Well, I mean, this isn’t going to take a priority.

3:37:19 So I would – I mean, I would say put it in the box of things

3:37:22 that needs to be done.

3:37:22 Yep.

3:37:23 But it’s not –

3:37:24 We can check the box and say it’s been reviewed still, even

3:37:27 though we haven’t revised it yet.

3:37:28 Well, in this case –

3:37:29 Right.

3:37:30 We don’t have this.

3:37:31 So we don’t have the box to check.

3:37:32 Yeah.

3:37:33 This can go at the end of the line.

3:37:34 This one needs to be –

3:37:35 Because we’re doing it.

3:37:36 All right.

3:37:37 If you guys go on to 2371, you got V version one and I think

3:37:45 version two.

3:37:47 You have two different versions here.

3:37:49 So we did this in 2020 when this came with the updates.

3:37:53 It seems to me that there’s been some updates.

3:37:54 It’s actually –

3:37:55 We adapted it as a new policy in 2020.

3:37:57 Mm-hmm.

3:37:58 It seems that ours follows version two pretty well.

3:38:01 Well, maybe not.

3:38:02 I think it’s version one.

3:38:03 Seems like we’ve got some more stuff in here.

3:38:04 Yeah.

3:38:05 This is version one.

3:38:06 It’s like version one to the T, it looks like.

3:38:08 All right.

3:38:09 Are we okay?

3:38:10 Why can it not open up my damn thing?

3:38:11 Okay.

3:38:12 All right.

3:38:13 Are we okay?

3:38:14 Why can it not open up my damn thing?

3:38:16 Okay.

3:38:17 All right.

3:38:25 Are we okay?

3:38:26 Why can it not open up my damn thing?

3:38:28 All right.

3:38:31 Yeah.

3:38:32 I’m okay with this one.

3:38:33 I think it’s good to remind people that the Hope Scholarship,

3:38:38 the last part of this policy,

3:38:42 because a lot of families don’t realize that they get the Hope

3:38:45 Scholarship for one year.

3:38:45 I’ve had parents reach out to me and they’re like, I don’t know

3:38:48 if I’m going to have it

3:38:48 anymore, but that it remains in place until the student

3:38:51 graduates from high school.

3:38:52 So just reminding people of that.

3:38:56 So we’re okay with taking the updated Neola version one?

3:39:00 It’s the same.

3:39:01 It is the same.

3:39:02 Is it identical?

3:39:03 I mean, we have numbers and they have letters.

3:39:04 That’s really the only difference.

3:39:05 Okay.

3:39:06 It’s a blend between the two basically.

3:39:07 Which what?

3:39:08 It’s a little bit of a blend between the two.

3:39:11 The next one should be easy.

3:39:13 We literally, this board adopted this in December.

3:39:16 It’s yeah.

3:39:17 School health services.

3:39:18 Yeah, this one.

3:39:19 I don’t want to change it a little bit.

3:39:21 We can skip it.

3:39:23 Skip it away.

3:39:24 We did this one already.

3:39:25 All right.

3:39:26 2411 guidance and counseling.

3:39:28 This one’s going to have to open up new.

3:39:31 So this is virtually the same with the exception.

3:39:47 The second section, we don’t have one of the options.

3:39:52 Be the responsibility of the classroom teacher who may draw upon

3:39:55 the services.

3:39:57 So I’m not sure.

3:39:59 That part that we don’t have is a program of guidance or

3:40:10 counseling shall be offered to all

3:40:11 students and shall be the responsibility of the classroom

3:40:14 teacher.

3:40:14 So in some ways they’re kind of doing that with a mental health

3:40:17 training.

3:40:18 But I think that’s a lot to put on them.

3:40:20 Yeah.

3:40:21 Responsibility.

3:40:22 Yeah.

3:40:23 I’m okay with leaving that out too.

3:40:24 Okay.

3:40:25 Yep.

3:40:26 So ABCD.

3:40:27 And this is an old Neola policy also.

3:40:29 So they didn’t, they don’t really have any updates.

3:40:32 Ours is good.

3:40:33 I mean, ours is actually better.

3:40:34 So we establish a referral system, which utilizes all the aid,

3:40:37 the schools and community

3:40:39 offer.

3:40:40 Yeah.

3:40:41 They don’t have a 24 11.01.

3:40:45 Yeah.

3:40:46 The only difference there.

3:40:47 So we’re okay on that one?

3:40:48 I’m okay on this one.

3:40:49 Keeping out that.

3:40:50 So Paul keeping it pretty much the same, right?

3:40:53 Yep.

3:40:54 Okay.

3:40:55 They do not have a 24 11.01 college and career readiness

3:40:59 assessment.

3:40:59 I like it.

3:41:00 We’ll keep what we have.

3:41:02 If you guys want to put in there anything about workforce, that’s

3:41:05 what my note said.

3:41:05 Anything about trades.

3:41:06 Talks about college career readiness instruction through regular

3:41:09 school programs prior to high school

3:41:10 graduation, college career readiness.

3:41:11 As long as you feel that that says, you know, that mean that

3:41:14 there’s.

3:41:15 We still, we still do that, right?

3:41:16 College career readiness assessment.

3:41:17 Oh yeah.

3:41:18 The number on B number two, it says Florida virtual school may

3:41:21 be used to provide the college

3:41:21 career instruction.

3:41:22 We, I mean, I don’t know.

3:41:23 Cause I, we, we have BVS.

3:41:24 I would say let’s not let.

3:41:25 Career and decision making course.

3:41:26 And students are allowed to substitute that with virtual school

3:41:27 if they choose.

3:41:27 Can we make it to where they’re not allowed to go to Florida

3:41:29 virtual school and they have

3:41:29 to go to ours?

3:41:30 No.

3:41:31 Just put it in there.

3:41:32 Um, just put it in there.

3:41:49 But we put it through Brevard Virtual School, the course, and

3:41:53 many of our students do it.

3:41:54 Um, state law is pretty specific on the virtual options.

3:41:58 Mine is taking it right now.

3:42:00 Through Brevard Virtual School.

3:42:02 Thank you, Ms. Campbell.

3:42:03 Shout out to BBS.

3:42:04 How about we take out the Florida piece and just put virtual

3:42:07 school may be used.

3:42:08 Is that better?

3:42:09 Roger that.

3:42:10 Okay.

3:42:11 We’re good there, Paul.

3:42:12 We’re going to make that one change.

3:42:13 Have you ever seen Paul’s notes?

3:42:14 We’re going to go through the whole policy so we can make that

3:42:17 one change.

3:42:17 Well, I know.

3:42:18 I hear you.

3:42:19 Okay.

3:42:20 You know what?

3:42:21 I’m just going to, I don’t know if anybody’s watching.

3:42:22 One more minute.

3:42:23 Because we’ve been so boring for the last little bit.

3:42:24 But I just have to say, people need to understand Brevard

3:42:28 Virtual, you can do everything with

3:42:30 Brevard Virtual just about as you can do with Florida Virtual

3:42:33 School.

3:42:33 Unless there’s just a course that we don’t offer.

3:42:34 But all the courses, most of course that your kids are going to

3:42:37 take, you can do through

3:42:38 Brevard Virtual School.

3:42:39 Keep it local.

3:42:40 All right.

3:42:41 24/12.

3:42:42 We’ve got Homebound Instructional Program.

3:42:43 Um, we have, it’s pretty much identical.

3:42:46 Identical.

3:42:47 There’s a line in here.

3:42:48 Yep.

3:42:49 I have a question.

3:42:50 I understand why it’s in there, being someone who had to teach

3:42:54 Hospital Homebound.

3:42:54 Um, but I just want to make sure that we’re still legal by

3:42:58 having it in there.

3:42:59 Um, the part that we have the right to schedule the time and

3:43:03 place.

3:43:03 I totally understand why it’s in there.

3:43:04 Yeah.

3:43:05 I just want to make sure that we’re still allowed to do that.

3:43:08 Yeah.

3:43:09 I taught Homebound also.

3:43:11 It’s a great opportunity.

3:43:12 All right.

3:43:13 We’re good to go there?

3:43:14 Yep.

3:43:15 All right.

3:43:16 So what we’ll do is, is it’s 4:30.

3:43:18 If we can earmark and say 24/16 and then you guys feel okay that

3:43:27 if 15, because Niela has

3:43:28 a 24/15.

3:43:29 Yeah.

3:43:30 Oh, dang it.

3:43:31 Dang it.

3:43:32 So you guys okay that if we move the school board meeting to a

3:43:34 certain time, we can get

3:43:34 a couple more in, or do you guys want to cancel off and do them

3:43:38 at the next workshop?

3:43:39 It’s up to you guys.

3:43:40 Sorry.

3:43:41 Say that again.

3:43:42 Move the school board meeting.

3:43:43 If we have a school board meeting that literally gets done at

3:43:47 seven o’clock, but it might not

3:43:49 because we have, we have like an hour and a half of administratives,

3:43:52 but yeah, I mean,

3:43:53 if it’s seven o’clock, by all means, let’s go.

3:43:56 Let’s just do this.

3:43:57 I understand that we don’t want to go into the night, right?

3:44:00 Yeah.

3:44:01 But we’ve got to get these done.

3:44:02 I know.

3:44:03 So if we can kind of find a schedule that works in both, I’m

3:44:06 okay with it as I have been since

3:44:08 the beginning, but I’d appreciate that.

3:44:10 Is that cool?

3:44:11 Well, I didn’t, I didn’t know why we canceled May 5th.

3:44:13 Yeah, I wasn’t.

3:44:14 Because it’s Cinco de Mayo.

3:44:15 Is that why it was canceled?

3:44:16 Well, it’s not for my daughter’s birthday, but I mean, I was

3:44:19 still willing to go in the

3:44:19 morning.

3:44:20 I mean, we’re all going out for tacos instead of doing our work.

3:44:22 Why didn’t we cancel May 5th?

3:44:23 We’re going in the morning too.

3:44:24 Oh, you’re talking about a meeting.

3:44:25 We’re good.

3:44:26 Let’s, let’s gavel this and go.

3:44:27 Okay.

3:44:28 All right.

3:44:29 Good.

3:44:30 Talk to you guys.

3:44:31 There we go.

3:44:38 Bye.