Updates on the Fight for Quality Public Education in Brevard County, FL
0:00 music
3:00 Thank you.
5:30 Good morning.
5:34 The September 12, 2023 Board Work Session is now in order.
5:37 Paul, roll call, please.
5:38 Mr. Season?
5:39 Here.
5:39 Ms. Wright?
5:40 Here.
5:40 Mr. Trent?
5:41 Here.
5:42 Ms. Campbell?
5:43 Here.
5:43 Ms. Jenkins?
5:44 Here.
5:45 Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
5:46 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America
5:54 and to the Republic for which
5:56 it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
6:00 justice for all.
6:03 Thank you for everybody that’s watching today.
6:06 We’ve got a 7,000 policy review.
6:08 We added a public speaking discussion afterwards.
6:10 And then any quick board comments.
6:13 Wanted the board to know that Dr. Rendell moved forward, which
6:17 was much needed in allowing staff
6:19 to get to get ahead of our policies because they’re ultimately
6:23 the ones that make the recommendations and stuff like that.
6:26 And if we have anything to add.
6:27 So Dr. Rendell had our three individuals that head up the
6:31 departments for each one of them that we’re covering today.
6:34 So the process is going to go that I’m going to read the actual
6:38 policy, ask Dr. Rendell if he has anything to add.
6:41 And then if we have anything to add for them, then we’re going
6:44 to move on to the next one, if that’s okay with you guys.
6:46 Okay.
6:47 My password is making me reset, like at this very moment.
6:52 So you need a minute?
6:54 No, we’re good.
6:56 Just keep going.
6:57 I have my notes.
6:58 Okay.
6:59 I’ll work on that.
7:01 Okay.
7:02 So the first policy is going to be 7,100 facilities planning.
7:05 BPS has a current policy.
7:08 NEOLA has a separate update.
7:11 Facilities recommendation, Dr. Rendell.
7:15 Thank you, Mr. Chair.
7:16 I’m going to have Ms. Hand respond to the next few of these.
7:21 And we don’t have this process perfected.
7:23 We don’t necessarily have a recommendation for each policy that’s
7:26 on the list.
7:27 But for many of them, we do.
7:29 So we’re going to give you the recommendations that we have for
7:31 the ones that we do have recommendations
7:33 for.
7:33 So, Sue.
7:34 Yes.
7:36 Thank you, sir.
7:36 For 7,100, we would recommend that the board refer that to staff
7:40 for some analysis and updating.
7:42 We did update the administrative procedure in 2022.
7:46 That was a detailed guide for the development of the student
7:48 accommodation plan.
7:49 And that’s working fine.
7:50 But the policy language may want to look at some of the language
7:55 in NEOLA as well as introduce
7:57 some language around charter and choice and how those play into
8:00 facilities planning.
8:01 So I’d like an opportunity to look at this one a little bit.
8:06 So the recommendation is to allow staff to look it over and then
8:09 bring it back to us.
8:10 Does anybody else from the board wish to make any comments?
8:12 I also would like to recommend that if you feel like you have
8:15 something that you may have
8:17 missed or something like that, please feel free to reach out to
8:20 Ms. Sue Hand during the
8:21 process of her review after we leave the meeting today.
8:24 If you feel like you have to say something, that would be good,
8:26 too.
8:27 So at this point, does anybody else wish to speak about 7,100?
8:30 Yeah, just briefly, I noticed in letter B, it says that you’ll
8:37 report to the board on
8:40 the enrollment by grades during the school year monthly.
8:43 I think we used to get updates.
8:47 I can’t remember what they’re called, but we get an email.
8:48 But it’s not broken down by grades.
8:51 So maybe we could refine that language because I don’t really
8:54 need to know every month how
8:56 many fifth graders, how many fourth graders, but more along the
8:59 lines of the student count.
9:01 That’s not the name of the document, but that we get, maybe make
9:04 that more along the lines
9:05 of what we’re actually doing.
9:07 It does break it down regionally and by grade bands or
9:11 elementary, middle, all that.
9:14 But I don’t want to put something in policy that we’re not
9:17 holding everybody to or would
9:19 want to hold everybody to.
9:19 Yeah, I’m happy to do that.
9:22 And then the other thing I wanted to look at is the state law
9:24 requires us to,
9:26 provide information every so often.
9:30 I feel like it’s monthly about the number of available seats in
9:34 each grade that has to
9:36 be published on our website.
9:37 So that may play into what we put into policy as well, that we
9:40 at least respond to state
9:41 law, which we are doing.
9:43 If I could pull up the yellow ones in front of me, which I will
9:46 be able to in a few minutes.
9:47 I think it gave us some choices monthly by semester or whatever.
9:50 I’m cool with semester or whatever.
9:52 All good.
9:54 Anybody else wish to comment?
9:55 Okay.
9:56 Rolling on to Dr. Rendell.
9:59 You got the, Mr. Hand’s going to, how do you want me to follow
10:02 up?
10:03 She’s going to go to all the way to 7120.
10:05 Okay.
10:06 7130 actually.
10:07 And you, you’d like me, you need me after every meeting, after
10:10 everyone to kind of mention,
10:12 hey, here’s what I heard.
10:13 Or do you feel like you’re comfortable about just rolling?
10:15 I think we’re recording it.
10:16 So I think we’re good.
10:16 Perfect.
10:17 All right.
10:17 7101 building permits in the code enforcement office.
10:20 Dr. Rendell.
10:22 Yep.
10:22 Ms. Hand’s going to take, like I said, all the way to 7130.
10:26 Okay.
10:26 Again, we’d like you to refer this one to staff.
10:29 I would like to look at some type of a hybrid between what VPS
10:33 has and Neola.
10:34 We contract our building official services right now.
10:38 So I may want to broaden the language.
10:40 It just is explicit about allowing for that.
10:43 I’d also want to check the building code reference.
10:46 It’s in Neola.
10:47 I think it’s outdated.
10:48 So there’s, there’s a couple of things that I wanted to look at
10:50 with this one and nothing major in terms of our operations,
10:53 but I do want to have an opportunity to have the policy reflect
10:56 our actual work.
10:58 Okay.
10:58 Does anybody else wish to comment on this policy?
11:01 Hearing none, move on to 7110 student accommodations.
11:06 Ms. Hand.
11:06 Yes.
11:08 7110 as a policy, in my opinion, is fine as is.
11:12 I do think the administrative procedure, the, the boundary
11:17 change procedure was,
11:18 updated in, uh, April of 2022 and that procedure is working well.
11:22 So that’s fine.
11:23 Um, the administrative procedures around school closures have
11:27 not been updated in some time.
11:29 We did not update on that in 2022.
11:32 I think those need to be updated.
11:35 Uh, but I wanted to go through the facility planning process
11:37 that we’re about to get started, uh, shortly.
11:40 Um, and that would probably be part of that process.
11:43 So in terms of the policy update, I think the policy is okay as
11:47 is, but this particular procedure does need to be, um, updated.
11:51 Would you like to send us the old copy or would you like us to
11:54 wait until you make a recommendation for a new one?
11:56 I think you might as well wait.
11:58 Okay.
11:59 Because I, I do think that the procedure really needs to be
12:01 quite different than what it is now.
12:02 Um, okay.
12:03 All right.
12:05 Um, next one up is 7110 AP school attendance boundary procedures,
12:10 school closure scope, school closure analysis.
12:13 I understand.
12:14 Yeah.
12:14 Are we all okay with the current way that we’re going to do it
12:17 is, is update 7110 Ms. Hand?
12:19 And those will all be in contained inside of there.
12:21 Yes.
12:22 So 7110, the policy I think is okay.
12:26 Just want to make sure I’ve got this list I’m going through.
12:28 Yep, so the 7110 administrative procedure is okay as is, and 7110
12:34 A and B administrative procedure needs, both of those need to be
12:38 updated.
12:39 Okay, next one up is 7130 implementation and management of
12:43 school concurrency Ms. Hand?
12:45 This is solely a Brevard policy.
12:48 There’s no NEOLA reference because this is a reflection of our
12:50 interlocal agreement and defines how we do school concurrency.
12:54 Uh, this is based on our interlocal agreement and our opinion is
12:58 it’s fine as is.
12:58 Yeah.
12:59 And there’s a couple of administrative procedures attached to it
13:01 that we might need to update.
13:02 So I wanted to say thank you.
13:03 Um, is there anybody here that wishes to speak to 7130?
13:06 No.
13:08 Okay.
13:08 Um, next up, uh, is going to be 7217 weapons.
13:12 Um, Dr.
13:14 Rendell.
13:14 Yeah.
13:15 So we would like you to refer that to staff, both 7217 and the
13:20 subsequent sections.
13:22 Um, we have the chief of schools and student services reviewing
13:25 this right now.
13:26 Okay.
13:26 And you said subsequent sections, would that be the next one,
13:29 which is 7230?
13:30 Or is that, um, subsequent sections just being 7270?
13:34 Oh, the 7217.
13:35 Okay.
13:35 Is there anybody that wishes to speak to the weapons 7217?
13:38 Yeah.
13:39 That one had not only July updates, but also a September update
13:43 that, uh, Ron had just sent us.
13:45 So we’ll make sure to incorporate all that in there.
13:47 Yep.
13:48 We’re good.
13:48 Yep.
13:49 All right.
13:49 Next one up is 7230 gifts, grants, and bequests.
13:53 Dr.
13:54 Rendell.
13:54 Uh, so human resources is looking at that.
13:57 So we’d like to refer it to staff and we’ll give you something
13:59 back.
14:00 Okay.
14:00 Does anybody wish to speak to 7230?
14:03 Um, I like ours.
14:05 Okay.
14:06 Oh, I did have on this, I think it’s this one.
14:09 Um, there is a section that I think it’s on.
14:16 I just don’t have it close enough.
14:17 Here we go.
14:17 Thank you.
14:18 Um, there’s a section that says, uh, it talks about the grant
14:22 procedures and I’ve trying to
14:23 find that it’s actually in, um, um, um, administrative
14:27 procedures 6111.
14:28 Um, so if we can maybe like, if we’re going back into it, if we
14:32 can hot link that.
14:34 And then we also have 9230, which is the same thing.
14:39 Um, so, uh, when we do them, maybe we have one or the other or
14:44 make them match at least.
14:46 Um, so that we’re not saying, cause I, from what I could tell,
14:50 they’re just about the same.
14:51 Yeah.
14:52 And Ms. Leszinski corrected me.
14:54 She’s got this one.
14:55 Okay.
14:56 And so, go ahead, Ms. Leszinski.
14:57 Ms. Campbell, I agree with you.
15:03 There are like three different policies that kind of reach out
15:06 to the different areas.
15:08 And, um, uh, what we want to do is to be able to take a look at
15:12 them and, and make sure that
15:14 it makes sense and the policies in there, the, the biggest thing
15:17 is to make sure PTOs and boosters
15:20 and those understand what the rules are and people are taking
15:23 the correct responsibility.
15:25 I appreciate that.
15:26 That’s all.
15:26 Yeah.
15:27 And just so everybody knows, Dr. Rendell and I had met, and
15:29 there’s a series of those that
15:31 you’re going to run into where they are in multiple spots, right?
15:34 So what staff’s doing is they’ve identified each one of them.
15:37 They’re in the process of saying, Hey, they’re in three
15:39 different spots.
15:40 Let’s pull them together.
15:41 Where’s the appropriate place and everything else.
15:43 So you may see more of that as we get moving.
15:45 Um, okay, 7240, Dr. Rendell.
15:50 Yes.
15:51 We’re going to go back to Ms. Hand for a little while.
15:53 7240, uh, looked at that in, in my opinion, that’s fine as is.
15:59 Is there anybody here that wishes to add anything to 70, 7240
16:04 site acquisition?
16:05 Um, there was a plate.
16:08 I just had a question.
16:09 Sorry, I’m behind on my clicking.
16:12 Um, there was a part that Paul that says, talks about an
16:16 executive session discussion of
16:18 possible school sites may be carried on an executive session.
16:21 Is that, is that, is it because it’s a legal meeting?
16:26 The, the rationale would be because if it gets out publicly that
16:31 the board may be looking at
16:33 some sites that could jeopardize, uh, I guess, a fair
16:37 negotiation process.
16:40 Okay.
16:40 Because now there’s going to be increased demand.
16:41 I would have to double check to make sure that, that exemption
16:45 still is there.
16:45 Right.
16:46 I mean, Neola still has it in there, but that’s just, it was
16:48 just kind of one of those things
16:49 that trigger, I was like, wait a minute, that’s not one of those
16:51 things you do your training
16:51 of what you have, this is so rare.
16:52 They haven’t updated there since 2002.
16:54 So I’m assuming it’s still there, but those are set to sunset
16:57 every five years.
16:59 So I would want to double check and make sure it didn’t sunset.
17:02 Um, so that was my question.
17:03 Um, other than that, it’s fine.
17:05 Okay.
17:06 Any, uh, anybody else in reference to the comp, the, uh, policy?
17:11 Okay.
17:12 Um, next up is going to be 7250 commemorative, commemoration of
17:18 school facilities.
17:19 Uh, yes, sir.
17:20 That had a substantial upgrade in June of 2022, and we’re pretty
17:24 satisfied with the way that’s
17:26 working.
17:27 Uh, may, uh, address the, um, the, uh, reference to leading and
17:31 learning.
17:32 Other than that, the, the procedural aspects of the policy are
17:35 fine.
17:36 There was some reference recently.
17:37 Okay.
17:38 I’m sorry.
17:39 Did you have anything else?
17:40 Did anybody else have anything to say on this topic?
17:42 No.
17:43 Ours is more detailed.
17:44 So I prefer ours.
17:45 There was some concern wrapped around a couple of the policies
17:49 in saying that once you named
17:51 a facility, you were not allowed to name another facility for
17:54 five years inside of your school.
17:56 Is that anywhere that you see?
17:58 Because that came to me from one of our principals that was
18:01 trying to rename something.
18:02 Are you seeing that?
18:03 Did you see that anywhere?
18:04 Like if I named my library, I can’t name another facility for
18:07 five years inside my school.
18:08 Let me take a look at that.
18:09 Yeah.
18:10 That wasn’t the intent.
18:11 Yeah.
18:12 I think that’s exactly what I think.
18:13 I think what they were trying to say is you can’t rename the
18:15 actual facility.
18:16 Over and over again.
18:17 And I think that that is the intent of the policy.
18:19 I just wanted to make sure that we get some sort of
18:21 clarification over that because we have
18:22 a couple of schools that are trying to name a couple of things.
18:24 Sure.
18:25 Make sure that that’s okay.
18:26 Okay.
18:27 Yeah.
18:28 Anybody else on that?
18:29 Yeah.
18:30 That says schools that complete the renaming process under this
18:32 section may not be considered
18:34 for renaming for at least five calendar years following board
18:38 action.
18:39 So I think that’s just saying you can’t rename a school within
18:43 five years.
18:44 Maybe they should be good to go.
18:47 Yep.
18:48 Well, I just think that we need a little bit of clarification on
18:50 that one and that would
18:51 be good.
18:52 Next up, does anybody else wish to have anything on 7,250?
18:56 Next up is 7,300 property custodianship.
18:59 Ms. Hand.
19:00 I believe that may be Ms. Lucinski.
19:02 Yeah.
19:03 Ms. Lucinski’s taking that one.
19:04 Okay.
19:05 There you go.
19:07 Okay.
19:08 For this one, it is not an Iola policy.
19:12 However, we do want to make sure that we are making sure that
19:17 principals and directors are,
19:20 you know, managing and taking care of their assets and equipment
19:25 and knowing where they are,
19:27 those kind of things.
19:28 And then there’s a C and D which really don’t fit in here.
19:34 It talks about making sure that the lights and the water and the
19:39 power and everything is
19:40 there.
19:41 So I think I would like to look at moving the A and B into
19:48 another policy to make it all one
19:52 and then work with facilities on C and D.
19:55 Okay.
19:56 This is Niola’s template.
19:57 I’m sorry?
19:58 This is a Niola template.
19:59 They’re exact.
20:00 They’re identical.
20:01 Yeah.
20:02 They’re the same.
20:03 We just filled in the gaps and designated.
20:04 Oh, I’m sorry.
20:05 I thought there was no.
20:06 Okay.
20:07 Yep.
20:08 So the Niola, I don’t know why they put those two together.
20:10 Yeah.
20:11 You can make changes.
20:12 That’s fine.
20:13 But yeah, it is just to clarify.
20:14 It is a Niola template.
20:15 Okay.
20:16 Thank you.
20:17 Okay.
20:18 So we’re going to work on that one and bring it back.
20:19 Yeah.
20:20 That’s what I was going to say.
20:21 I’m checking it out.
20:22 All right.
20:23 Next up is 7,305 easements.
20:24 And I would like to recommend that you refer that to staff.
20:27 The policy is really okay as it is.
20:29 But every once in a while we have a request for an easement
20:32 where we should be compensated
20:33 for the value of that easement.
20:34 And so I’d like to potentially incorporate some language around
20:38 getting an appraisal
20:38 and getting appraised value for the value of the easement.
20:42 Could we be putting in there also as far as the advertising and
20:45 stuff like that that we have?
20:47 Any kind of definitions for we run into the Department of
20:50 Transportation and some of those
20:52 others.
20:53 Is this an area that we could enter into that or do you think
20:56 that this is just specifically
20:56 for the transaction?
20:57 This is just specifically for easements.
20:58 Okay.
20:59 All right.
21:00 Okay.
21:01 Anybody else have anything to say on easement 7,305?
21:04 All right.
21:05 Next up is 7310, disposition of surplus property.
21:09 I’m assuming this goes back to Ms. Lasinski?
21:11 Yes.
21:12 That’s correct.
21:13 This one we are very happy with and there’s just going to be a
21:18 couple of minor changes.
21:19 Yeah.
21:20 Administrative procedure updated in 2010.
21:22 I’m sure that that’s where it’s going to go.
21:24 Does anybody else wish to speak to this policy?
21:26 Are we at 7310?
21:27 Mm-hmm.
21:28 We don’t have D. We don’t have the rest of the disposition part.
21:37 Is that what you’re just saying?
21:39 Ours ends with like one paragraph of disposition and then the NEOLA
21:43 template has a lot more.
21:45 So we can incorporate those sections.
21:48 I think that’s a little more specific with how we get rid of
21:53 stuff for lack of it.
21:54 Yeah.
21:55 And I think we have a pretty strong, robust process.
22:00 I would find that if it’s not anywhere in our policies.
22:03 But did you understand what Ms. Lasinski, what she was trying to
22:06 say?
22:06 She’s just trying to say that there’s a NEOLA portion of it.
22:08 It may be in another place.
22:09 Right.
22:10 To deal with the disposition.
22:11 Right.
22:12 And that falls under procurement.
22:16 But we can make sure that this is all in one so it makes sense.
22:19 Right.
22:20 As long as it’s in there somewhere.
22:22 Okay.
22:25 And thank you, Ms. Wright, for pointing that out.
22:27 The next one is 7320.
22:29 Acquisition, removal, disposition, sale, or exchange of major
22:32 tangible personal property.
22:34 Ms. Lasinski.
22:35 So that’s actually under the Chief Operating Officer, Chief of
22:39 Operations.
22:40 So he’s going to review that and bring it back.
22:42 Okay.
22:43 Anybody else wish to have anything to say about this one policy?
22:46 Yeah, I would like to chime in on this one.
22:49 Rashad, you know where I’m going with this one.
22:51 I think we received emails.
22:52 And so just making sure we tighten that thing up so that we no
22:55 longer are disposing of something
22:57 that could be used or donated.
22:58 That’s been something that the community has been very vocal
23:01 about taking pictures of.
23:02 So anything we can do to tighten that up would be good.
23:05 Thank you.
23:06 Appreciate you.
23:07 I think that was in 7310 though.
23:09 Or that was the one that I was talking about that we have one
23:13 paragraph on disposition.
23:14 And the Neela template has like quite a bit more that we would
23:19 want to include.
23:20 This one, what I had written down was that we don’t have that
23:24 section on school memorials and gifts
23:26 that we probably need to add in there, which would kind of be in
23:31 a couple of your roms.
23:33 Yeah, it was kind of in an earlier policy too.
23:36 The memorials, the gifts?
23:37 Yeah.
23:38 Yeah, they blend.
23:39 Yep.
23:40 But as long as we have it in there somewhere.
23:42 We’ll try to make sure everything matches.
23:44 Yeah, that one had a 2020 update.
23:46 So I don’t know if that was the newer language that needed to be
23:49 added in.
23:49 Probably.
23:50 So we’re good with taking a look at it, bringing it back, and
23:54 any cross references cleaning up,
23:55 right?
23:56 Okay.
23:57 Next up is policy 7410.
23:59 Dr. Rendell?
24:00 Yeah, I think that’s you.
24:01 That one’s back to me.
24:02 Okay.
24:03 So I’d actually like to suggest some fairly significant changes
24:08 to this policy that are
24:10 over and above what’s in Neola or what’s in our current policy.
24:13 And those relate to institutionalizing our best practices of
24:18 doing periodic facility assessments,
24:21 doing facility asset management programs, and then incorporating
24:26 something about standards
24:27 for building and grounds maintenance.
24:29 And that’s been a big issue for us here in Brevard over the last
24:32 several years.
24:32 And I think we’re moving towards trying to fully resolve that
24:36 issue.
24:36 It certainly has budget implications.
24:38 But I feel like from a policy perspective, if we incorporate
24:41 those things, then it is setting
24:44 a message in terms of how we develop our budgets that those
24:46 things are important.
24:47 So I’m going to suggest that we incorporate at least those three
24:51 things into this policy.
24:52 And I wanted to say in this policy, Ms. Hand took over and
24:57 started a process where she was putting QR codes on many of our
25:02 maintenance things like HVAC systems and stuff like that.
25:07 And prior to that, we would just find out this thing broke, and
25:10 then they would have to go out and try to figure out what it was,
25:13 what year it was, what a replacement.
25:15 And now we’ve done a good job, or you have done a good job, I’m
25:19 saying, of QR coding most of them to where we know that there’s
25:23 a cycle of we need to buy this many at this time to make sure we
25:26 cover it and you’re getting there.
25:27 So I just wanted to say thank you for that.
25:28 That was a huge undertaking, and I don’t know if the new board
25:30 members know about it.
25:31 Well, thanks.
25:32 This is really a best practice in facility management, and we’re
25:36 doing pretty well in comparison to other districts.
25:38 I’m really proud of the program that our folks have developed.
25:41 So I’d like to give it a little bit more weight in policy other
25:46 than where it is now.
25:48 It’s just something that we’re doing.
25:50 Well, I really appreciate that.
25:52 Anybody else have anything to say to 7410 Maintenance?
25:55 All right, next up is 7420 Sanitation and Housekeeping.
25:59 Dr. Rendell?
26:00 That’s me.
26:01 That’s me, and I recommend just leaving that as is.
26:04 Okay.
26:05 Does anybody else wish to add anything to it?
26:08 20?
26:09 Yeah, NEOLA has an update.
26:12 We didn’t update it since 2020, 2002.
26:15 We’ve updated ours since then.
26:18 If you feel, ours just says NEOLA 2002.
26:22 We revised it on the ‘14.
26:23 But Ms. Hanna, if you feel confident that this is something that
26:27 we should keep, then this is your area.
26:28 I’m okay with that.
26:29 Okay.
26:30 All right.
26:31 Anybody else?
26:32 Nope.
26:33 All right.
26:34 Moving forward, 7421 Restrooms and Changing Facilities.
26:37 So we do not have a policy currently, so we’re looking for board
26:42 direction on this one.
26:44 That’s weird.
26:49 So this is an update that came to us from NEOLA.
26:52 Correct.
26:53 That we said we needed it.
26:54 I’m sorry.
26:55 Go ahead, Ms. Campbell.
26:56 Well, I was going to ask, is this – I mean, we’re complying
27:03 with state law.
27:04 I was going to ask Paul, do we need this to clarify for clarity
27:11 for our staff?
27:12 And do we need – well, first, do we need to have the policy for
27:15 compliance?
27:15 I couldn’t find anywhere where it said – it just said, if I
27:18 send such time, you have to
27:19 report how you’re handling things.
27:21 But I didn’t know if we needed the policy for compliance.
27:23 So that was one question.
27:24 Right.
27:25 And then, secondly, really, to Dr. Rendell, do we need this for
27:29 clarity so that all our
27:30 district staff can understand this is how we’re handling things?
27:34 Yeah.
27:35 Typically, policy helps you answer all those questions.
27:37 So typically, you would want something in policy, you know,
27:40 clear definitions, black and white,
27:41 that kind of thing.
27:42 Yeah, yeah.
27:43 I’m in favor of us including this for clarity for public and for
27:47 staff.
27:47 Anybody else?
27:48 I support including it as well.
27:50 Okay.
27:51 I do too.
27:52 Dr. Rendell, if you can look back at it, there’s a couple of
27:54 options on there.
27:54 I think maybe bring back a formalized policy.
27:56 Yeah, we’ll take a look at the – I think there’s three
27:59 different options to choose from
28:00 and different language in there and we’ll bring you back
28:02 something.
28:02 Okay.
28:03 All right.
28:04 With that, next up is 7430 risk reduction program.
28:07 Dr. Rendell?
28:08 That is with finance with Cindy.
28:11 Ms. Osinski.
28:13 We definitely want to keep this one and actually look – work
28:26 with facilities and robust that,
28:28 because we want to make sure that we’re reducing risk as much as
28:31 possible.
28:31 Sure.
28:32 Okay.
28:33 So, send it to you.
28:34 You guys will bring it back to us.
28:35 Dr. Rendell, just out of curiosity, the turnaround on some of
28:40 these policies, is there a – just
28:42 for the board to know, are we looking at 30 days of having staff
28:46 look at them?
28:47 What are you thinking?
28:48 Well, really, we’re looking at the cycle that you’re in.
28:50 As you get through each series of policies, we try to, you know,
28:55 fall right in line.
28:56 When you get – when you’re done with the sevens, you get to the
28:58 eights and so on, we bring them back.
29:00 Some of these we can fast track if we need to, you know.
29:04 So, if we are coming up with the eights, maybe the idea is that
29:07 the 1,000s are on the deck and coming for renewal.
29:11 You know what I mean?
29:12 Correct.
29:13 Like, if you think about next week’s workshop, we’ve got some 1,000
29:16 policies that have been revised coming back for public hearing
29:19 and stuff like that.
29:19 Yeah.
29:20 You know, the first public hearing is next board workshop for
29:25 all of the ones.
29:26 I think for the most part, the idea would be that, you know what
29:32 I mean, we have some sort of a plan moving forward.
29:33 Yep.
29:34 The 1,000s are here, the 2,000s and everything else.
29:36 So, I appreciate that.
29:37 We can send you kind of a calendar.
29:38 Yeah.
29:39 Like, when we believe these policies will be ready to bring back
29:42 to you.
29:42 With the understanding that some of them take a little bit
29:44 longer than others and some of them may need to reach out for
29:47 further clarification and stuff.
29:48 Sure.
29:49 But for the most part, just a generalized one would be good.
29:54 Okay.
29:55 Next up is 7430.01 Environmental Health Program.
29:59 We don’t.
30:00 We don’t have a policy.
30:01 Right.
30:02 Neola has one.
30:03 What do you think, Dr. Rendell?
30:04 I think Sue was ready to jump in on that.
30:06 Yeah, I’ll grab this one.
30:07 Okay.
30:08 I’d like to take a look at that.
30:09 I’ll take the lead from a department point of view, but we’ve
30:12 got several other departments that might have been put into this
30:15 potential policy.
30:16 So, we’ll come back to you with a recommendation on it.
30:19 Okay.
30:20 So, I’m sorry.
30:21 Go ahead.
30:22 We have this at 8400.
30:24 I mean, that I could tell it was very similar, at least, and
30:27 that we did update in 2020.
30:28 So, we can take a look and see if that’s – we haven’t got to 8000
30:31 yet, so I don’t know what the templates look like.
30:32 But, if we can see if that’s our – if we already have all that
30:38 content there, then maybe we don’t need that new policy.
30:43 We good with that, Ms. Hand?
30:45 Yes, sir.
30:46 Okay.
30:47 Moving on.
30:48 7434, smoking and tobacco-free environments.
30:51 Again, there’s a Neola policy that we have.
30:55 We do not currently have one, but I do know we have some rules
30:58 around smoking and stuff like that.
31:00 Ms. Hand, you wish to – is this your area?
31:03 It is not.
31:04 I don’t believe me.
31:05 Okay.
31:06 Dr. Rendell, I apologize.
31:07 Yeah.
31:08 No, this is – it falls under operations.
31:11 It also falls under chief of schools.
31:12 It also falls under risk management.
31:14 So, we’re reviewing this and we’ll bring it back.
31:16 Okay.
31:17 So, before we get off this one, we have this at 3215, and then
31:21 we had this conversation in the 5,000s about – because in the
31:25 student section, I remember Ms. Wright said, you know, let’s
31:27 have it both places so it’s very clear.
31:28 People look at – but I don’t think we need it in three places.
31:31 So, we have it in the 3215, which I think is a staff section,
31:37 and we’ve talked about adding it in the 5,000s under the student
31:41 section.
31:41 Student section, correct.
31:42 And we most recently updated it in 2021.
31:44 So, I think we might be good with –
31:47 And the idea is to always make it mirror.
31:50 If it’s in 3,000s and 5,000s, it’s the language at all.
31:53 Right.
31:54 And honestly, I mean, I guess it is a facilities type thing, but
31:58 really more – it’s more of a behavior type thing.
32:00 So, I think that we’re – those other two sections is a more
32:04 appropriate place.
32:05 Yep.
32:06 And again, I think these are the ones – we’re going to come
32:08 across many of these – where staff can give us the
32:11 recommendations.
32:12 Thank you for bringing that up, Ms. Campbell.
32:14 Next up is 7440 Buildings and Ground Security.
32:17 I’m assuming that I’m going to ask Dr. Rendell who has this one.
32:20 It’s all operations, and that whole section of the 7440s, we’re
32:25 reviewing all of that.
32:26 I don’t know if Mr. Wilson has anything to add right now, but,
32:30 you know.
32:31 Would you like me just to say 7440, 7440.01, 7440.02, 03, all
32:38 are going to be reviewed by Mr. Wilson and come back?
32:43 Or do you guys want to –
32:44 This is one of them.
32:45 I think Russ said he wants to have a conversation, right, over
32:46 the video surveillance and electronic monitoring.
32:49 Yeah, it’s just – it’s a cross-functional one.
32:51 So, it’s Rashad and myself.
32:53 It’s a 74.
32:54 Yeah, okay.
32:55 Well, then we’ll just say, so 7440, Rashad’s going to work on it
32:58 and bring back a recommendation if needed.
33:00 Is that right, Dr. Rendell?
33:01 Correct.
33:02 And then 7440.01, video surveillance and electronic monitoring.
33:06 Did you have something to say, Mr. Cheatham?
33:09 Well, he wrote that on the spreadsheet.
33:12 He said discussion was needed.
33:13 Hang on just a second.
33:14 I don’t want to get off of 7440 yet.
33:16 Okay.
33:17 Don’t rush because we might have a comment along the way.
33:22 I didn’t have anybody speak up.
33:24 I didn’t get a chance.
33:25 You didn’t pause long enough.
33:27 I see the note, must remove resident mobile homes.
33:30 I saw that in there.
33:31 I’m like, what on earth?
33:33 So, is that some – I know that we used to do it because there
33:36 was a mobile home on the campus of Central Middle School that
33:38 just recently got removed literally in the last year.
33:39 And I – somebody was living in there and I always – it was
33:42 just some kind of random – so how did that come about?
33:45 Yeah.
33:46 Are we still – is that the only place where it was done or –
33:48 Yeah.
33:49 There’s –
33:50 Do we still have people living on our campuses?
33:51 I mean –
33:52 There’s approximately 16 in the district.
33:54 And are there people who live there just people who apply to
33:57 live there?
33:57 No.
33:58 They were long – I guess long before any of us got here, they
34:02 were security for the site.
34:04 So they were – they agreed to monitor the site and they would
34:07 check the doors and the property to make sure nothing was going
34:11 on at night when it was closed.
34:13 Okay.
34:14 And this is all before the new security requirements and fencing
34:18 and cameras and all of that.
34:19 Right, right.
34:20 So they’ve just never been terminated.
34:22 So they’ve just continued to function in that capacity.
34:25 Are we paying them or are we just providing –
34:26 No.
34:27 They get free rent.
34:28 They basically get a lot to put their trailer and they monitor
34:32 the property in exchange for –
34:33 The free lot.
34:34 It is –
34:36 Inventive.
34:37 And I’m – but I mean, we still have people –
34:43 So we do have about 16 of those mobile homes on our campuses, on
34:49 16 campuses.
34:51 And we did make the decision earlier to let them know that we’re
34:55 going to terminate this policy at the end of June.
34:57 Okay.
34:58 So this will be the last year any of them –
35:00 Of June of 2024.
35:01 June of 2024.
35:02 Okay.
35:03 So they’ve got some time to relocate.
35:04 Right.
35:05 So we’re going to stop this practice.
35:06 Wow.
35:07 This is something done years ago, as Mr. Gibbs mentioned, to
35:10 provide an extra layer of security
35:13 for our campuses, usually at night and on the weekends, you know,
35:17 when we’re not occupied.
35:18 So these individuals were allowed to live there basically rent
35:22 free in return for providing a security service.
35:24 Right.
35:25 In a lot of the cases, that security service is actually not
35:29 provided.
35:29 And so we’re not seeing the return on investment, so to speak,
35:32 even though we don’t really have an investment.
35:34 But really with the new security procedures, we don’t want
35:37 anybody living on our campuses.
35:39 Right.
35:41 So this is something that was supposed to be phased out years
35:45 ago and it never had gotten phased out, so now we’re phasing it
35:49 out.
35:49 Well, that solved a mystery for me.
35:51 I don’t know why I didn’t ask that question before.
35:54 But thank you.
35:55 I appreciate that.
35:56 So I did want to tell you guys, when I was a teacher at Space
36:01 Coast, they used to do reverse sound.
36:03 So what would happen is the sound from Space Coast High School
36:07 would go back into the house of the person that was staying
36:11 there in between there and Enterprise.
36:12 So if there was a loud noise at night, it would pop and they
36:15 would know to check, call security, stuff like that.
36:17 So those were some of the things that people had put in place
36:20 with these individuals to make sure that they were safe.
36:22 And it did actually end up catching a couple of kids trying to
36:25 play pranks and a couple other people trying to break in.
36:27 So it was actually pretty good.
36:28 The one that I did want to tell you guys about that was pretty
36:31 funny was we had one that was staying at a location and then put
36:34 it up for sale and tried to sell it.
36:35 And that was a whole ordeal that we had to deal with.
36:38 It was in my district and it was pretty funny because and it
36:41 wasn’t even the person that we had originally signed it with.
36:43 It was somebody else who had been living there after that person
36:46 had deceased.
36:47 And it was and there was a whole battle and it was an
36:52 interesting thing.
36:53 So I think we’re at a different place now for our security and
36:57 stuff like that.
36:58 So we’re in a different place altogether.
36:59 So thank you for doing that.
37:00 But I did want to put some context to some of it.
37:02 There are some good things and there are some bad things.
37:05 And then there’s one that was growing chickens on the thing and
37:07 that was an interesting thing too.
37:08 Science.
37:09 No, it wasn’t science.
37:11 It actually seems like it would be counterintuitive now because
37:15 if you open it to a driveway because someone lives there, then
37:18 you’re opening the fence, external fencing to let other people.
37:19 So I think this is a good time with all the new rules.
37:22 Absolutely.
37:23 I’m supportive of that.
37:24 I have a quick question just to chime into this.
37:25 Sue, I’m sure you know this, but as far as the residents that
37:27 are living on these 16 different properties, is there any way
37:31 you can give the board some feedback on how long these people
37:33 have been there?
37:33 I mean, is this going to be someone that’s been on campus?
37:36 I mean, I just think about a family that’s been there for 30
37:39 years or something and they’re like, oh, now you have to move
37:41 and we’re kicking you out.
37:42 And so just so you can give that to us so that we know that and
37:46 prepare for that coming up.
37:47 I have those contracts currently because I drafted the notices
37:52 so I can email you all.
37:53 Okay, thank you.
37:54 How long everybody’s been on and what the properties are that
37:57 they’re located.
37:58 Okay, thank you.
37:59 In most cases, I don’t think that the schools actually had
38:02 communications with many of them before.
38:04 All the ones I’ve ever had, they were not communicating back and
38:08 forth.
38:08 They were just there and it was kind of an odd thing.
38:10 So I just want to kind of add that context.
38:13 There are maybe some that they have relationships, but I don’t
38:16 know.
38:16 The ones I know about, they typically are not families.
38:18 They’re generally single individuals.
38:20 Okay.
38:21 Yep.
38:22 All right.
38:23 I would just like to know that.
38:24 Sure.
38:25 All right.
38:26 So that was just 740, 7440, and 7440 01, I believe Russ does
38:32 want to make comments.
38:33 But I did want to finish up on that one.
38:35 We do have some custodians that actually live in those.
38:39 So there is one that I know of.
38:41 So that we may want to take a look at because that may be an
38:44 added incentive for somebody that’s
38:46 working there to be there.
38:47 The issue with having a security trailer on site is that they’re
38:52 not separate from the campus.
38:54 And so this is someone’s home and they can invite literally
38:58 anyone at any time onto the campus
39:00 and not go through our security protocols.
39:02 So that’s the reason why we think this is no longer an
39:05 appropriate security function.
39:07 Okay.
39:08 And in a few cases, we’re looking at doing some fencing around
39:12 the security trailer to make
39:13 sure that they are separate from campus.
39:15 In those cases where we’re concerned about them being like a
39:18 safety hazard where they’re
39:19 close to the road or something like that.
39:21 Yeah.
39:22 Okay.
39:23 All right.
39:24 Thank you.
39:25 Next one up, Dr. Rendell, Video Surveillance and Electronic
39:28 Monitoring.
39:28 You had something to say.
39:29 Mr. Cheatham, did you want to jump?
39:31 Yeah, I just wanted to comment.
39:32 It’s cross-functional between ET operations and facilities.
39:36 So we’ll be reviewing it and bringing that back to the board.
39:39 Okay.
39:40 Anybody else wish to have anything to say on that one?
39:42 The difference that I noticed was the parental consent part.
39:47 So we need to have that.
39:50 I mean, it’s basically anything that we would be recording for
39:53 is going to fall under that
39:55 educational purposes and things like that.
39:57 But I’m going to just guess if that was that 2021 update because
40:02 that falls under the line
40:03 the year that we were doing the parental rights bill.
40:08 So that’s the section that I noticed that we do not have.
40:13 Okay.
40:16 You good?
40:17 Yeah.
40:18 Okay.
40:19 Good, Mr. Cheatham.
40:22 All right.
40:23 Moving forward, 7440.01 damage or loss.
40:26 Dr. Rendell.
40:27 So again, this is something I believe staff is going to review
40:30 and bring back.
40:31 This is Ms. Leszinski.
40:33 Any comments or?
40:34 No, that’s something that we need to.
40:36 Review and bring back.
40:39 Exactly.
40:40 Okay.
40:42 Anybody have any questions on 7440.02?
40:46 Yeah.
40:48 Theirs has a lot more legal ramifications as far as what we can
40:55 do if someone does damage.
40:56 I don’t know if you noticed that, Paul, but there was in the NEOLA
40:59 template, even though
40:59 they were from the same year, it had more, and we could
41:04 potentially go out to get damages
41:06 and things like that.
41:07 Right.
41:08 So I’d like your advisement on that one too.
41:10 Yeah.
41:11 It’s really, I know some boards are hesitant to take legal
41:15 action against students.
41:16 Yeah.
41:17 So that’s probably why the board in 2002, they said, no, we’re
41:20 not going to be suing our
41:21 families for it.
41:22 Right.
41:23 They chose not to implement certain provisions, but I don’t know
41:27 how we’d find that other
41:28 than trying to dig up minutes if they still exist.
41:30 Right.
41:31 Well, and it’s not that I’m looking to go, but I mean, I can
41:34 foresee a situation that
41:35 might be bigger than-
41:36 Right.
41:37 They can include it and use a language that’s permissive like
41:40 may.
41:40 Right.
41:41 So then it’s up to the board at the time to decide whether or
41:44 not it wants to take those
41:45 legal steps.
41:46 I think that’s probably a wise decision.
41:48 I mean, we had an incident with one of my schools last year
41:50 where a fire was started in
41:51 a bathroom intentionally by a student.
41:52 Right.
41:53 With the TikTok challenges and things.
41:54 That’s a little different than just-
41:55 Things have changed significantly since 2002.
41:56 Yeah.
41:57 Right.
41:58 Exactly.
41:59 And they were dismantling our bathrooms and doing all kinds of
42:00 stuff.
42:00 So it’s probably good to have the ability to exercise that
42:04 should it be something that’s
42:04 just so out there.
42:05 At least just have it in policies that people are aware that
42:08 that’s a potential-
42:09 It’s a potential.
42:10 Right.
42:11 Good.
42:12 Anybody else?
42:13 Yeah.
42:14 All right.
42:15 Staff’s going to bring back a recommendation.
42:17 And again, if anybody has anything in the process to follow up
42:20 with, please do so.
42:22 74.
42:23 That’s right.
42:24 7440.02 damage or loss.
42:27 03.
42:28 Yeah.
42:29 We just did that.
42:30 I’m sorry.
42:31 7440.03 small unmanned aircraft systems.
42:33 We just went through this one, right?
42:34 Yeah.
42:35 We just revised that one.
42:36 So we would just prefer to keep it.
42:38 Yeah.
42:40 It’s just straight to the lot of the DOE for not-
42:41 Yep.
42:42 7440.03.
42:43 All right.
42:45 Anybody else got anything to say on that one?
42:46 Nope.
42:47 All right.
42:48 7450 property inventory.
42:49 Dr. Rendell.
42:50 That’s fine.
42:51 Yeah.
42:52 That was with, I believe with you as well.
42:55 Yep.
42:56 Right.
42:57 And this is another one that we want to have our staff take a
43:00 look at and review and make sure
43:02 that we include grant managers and responsibility for the
43:06 different areas.
43:07 Okay.
43:08 Anybody have any comments on this one?
43:10 Nope.
43:11 Moving forward.
43:12 7455 accounting system for fixed assets.
43:15 Dr. Rendell.
43:16 I think that’s the same with Ms. Luzinski.
43:18 We want to review that, correct?
43:19 So some changes we’ve already identified.
43:21 We want to keep the update.
43:23 Okay.
43:24 Is there a difference between, is there a purposeful difference
43:28 between using fixed and
43:30 capital?
43:31 I was checking the statutes and they don’t really, and the rule,
43:34 they don’t really use one or
43:34 the other.
43:35 Was that just a Brevard decision or does it legally matter?
43:39 You don’t think so?
43:41 Part of the changes was crossing out capital and putting fixed,
43:45 so.
43:45 Okay.
43:47 And then there was, there is an administrative procedure.
43:55 I’ve got to read my notes.
43:58 I said administrative procedure 7310.
44:00 Why do I have that in there?
44:04 Oh, the disposition.
44:09 If we go, if we update the disposition policy, there was
44:14 something in there that needs to
44:16 be related to that.
44:19 Okay.
44:20 Well, y’all look at that.
44:22 I can’t remember.
44:23 I didn’t write down enough notes to remember what it was.
44:26 Oh, the superintendent shall develop administrative procedures
44:30 to ensure proper purchase, transfer,
44:31 and disposal of fixed assets.
44:33 That’s what I was saying.
44:34 We already have that administrative procedure at, but not with
44:38 this one.
44:38 It’s at 7310.
44:39 So, you know, it doesn’t have to be with this one, but I, if we’re
44:44 going to say something
44:45 has a procedure, in this case, we have it.
44:47 It’s just not located here.
44:48 So, do with that what you want.
44:50 Even if we just link it or something, that would be good.
44:53 Did you guys understand that?
44:57 Yes.
44:58 Okay.
44:59 So, anybody else have anything to say?
45:01 Nope.
45:02 7455 is in the good.
45:04 Moving on.
45:05 7460, conservation of natural and material resources.
45:09 Talked about this policy, having some discussion.
45:12 We’ve had some discussion around this too.
45:14 Ms. Suhan.
45:15 Itself in the Neola version, they’re sort of inert, but we often
45:25 have competing interests
45:28 in this arena.
45:30 So, for example, having a very strong recycling goal might
45:34 actually cost us more money.
45:35 saving money might cause us to do draconian measures around air
45:39 conditioning.
45:40 Right.
45:41 So, there’s often a competing priority in this arena.
45:45 So, if the board would like to keep a policy around
45:48 consideration of conservation in the context
45:51 of other roles, I can write something that says that.
45:56 But I wanted to just ask what you all think about this policy.
46:02 I had a lot to talk about on this, but I’ll give you guys the
46:04 opportunity to speak ahead of me.
46:07 So, if I’m hearing you correctly, so like our practice of
46:12 cutting off the air conditionings
46:14 for extended periods of time, every time I go out with someone
46:19 who is an air conditioning person,
46:20 they say, “This is not good because we’re, you know, you wouldn’t
46:25 do this in your home.
46:25 It’s hard on the machines or whatever.”
46:26 Is this policy driving that or is it just cost?
46:29 Because I always thought that was cost savings, but then in the
46:32 end you have to balance the cost savings
46:33 of cutting the ACs off versus damage to your equipment.
46:37 Right. So, we’ve actually made decisions to not do that because
46:42 of the damage to our stuff.
46:45 And so, we’ve been lowering our set points and we’re running the
46:48 air conditioning more
46:50 because we want our folks to be comfortable in their buildings.
46:53 If we don’t do that, it leads to indoor air quality issues and
46:56 we chase those all around.
46:57 So, there’s, like I said, a lot of competing interests.
47:00 I think I could wordsmith something that addresses the fact that
47:03 there are competing interests.
47:05 And conservation is a good goal, but it’s not the only goal.
47:09 And I think it needs to be in the context of some of our other
47:13 priorities, so.
47:14 Right. No, I appreciate that.
47:16 And if your recommendation is to, because like you said,
47:19 it’s a pretty benign policy in general, on the surface.
47:23 Right. But if it’s causing problems and we’re not with us having
47:28 to put this as a goal,
47:28 I’m fine with removing it.
47:30 Anybody else?
47:31 Yeah.
47:32 Let’s see.
47:33 Talk.
47:34 No?
47:35 No.
47:36 I was just getting straight.
47:37 Okay.
47:38 All right.
47:39 I thought he was going for it.
47:40 Okay.
47:41 So, when I look at this, we have solar, natural gas, battery.
47:45 We have all of these things, right?
47:46 And consistently, we have individuals coming and saying, “Hey,
47:50 we can make natural gas
47:51 buses and they can run and save you money and solar.
47:54 You won’t have to pay for electricity after five years.”
47:57 And there are some things that when you look at them, you’re
48:00 like,
48:00 “Hey, it’s our due diligence to take a look at those.”
48:03 And I know that you’re already doing that.
48:04 Yes.
48:05 And like fuel sources and everything else.
48:08 I wonder if there’s an opportunity for us to do like a every
48:11 three year review and have a,
48:14 you know, bring forward, “Hey, here’s what the newest
48:16 technologies are.
48:17 Here’s where the cost breaks are on them.”
48:20 That might be a little bit more of a formal process so that we’re
48:23 not missing some of those components.
48:24 Sure.
48:25 What do you think about that?
48:26 So, like I said, I think I can wordsmith something that
48:29 addresses that because we do exactly what you suggested.
48:31 So, for example, we’re doing several roof projects.
48:34 We looked at solar.
48:35 Yeah.
48:36 It’s not going to save us money at this point in time and it has
48:39 the potential to damage the roof.
48:41 So, you know, they’re, again, competing interests.
48:44 But, yes, we certainly do want to look at new technology.
48:47 Same thing in fuel sources.
48:49 You know, Mr. Wilson’s been looking at different fuel sources
48:52 and buses, you know, for the bus fleet.
48:54 You know, great best practice.
48:56 But we’ve got to be able to get natural gas.
48:58 We’ve got to be able to have electric charging.
49:00 Like the source of those alternative fuels has to be readily
49:05 available too.
49:06 So, I think what you’re suggesting, Mr. Susan, might be a way to
49:09 kind of keep the policy.
49:11 But we would generate our own language around those different
49:15 competing interests.
49:16 Yeah, and I think just in practice is to review any kind of
49:20 innovative pieces in this.
49:22 Like even the recycling piece, there’s some innovation inside of
49:26 there.
49:26 I was in one county and the county government tied with the
49:30 school district and had this trash recycling program that
49:34 created energy.
49:34 I mean, there’s some cool stuff out there, right?
49:36 But I wonder if there’s an opportunity to do that and then maybe
49:39 there’s an opportunity where we have a work session every three
49:42 years or something like that that says,
49:43 or every two years this is what it is, this is what we evaluated
49:45 and stuff like that.
49:46 Since you’re doing it already, our public will know.
49:49 You know, these guys that come up and try to sell solar and they
49:52 try to do this, they try to do that.
49:52 Hey, listen, we already did that.
49:53 Here’s the workshop.
49:54 Here’s the individual.
49:55 Here’s your opportunity to talk to more of a formal process.
49:58 That’s all.
49:59 Yeah.
50:00 And we are looking at different sort of like energy conservation
50:04 techniques.
50:04 And are there opportunities to do little pilot projects in our
50:08 schools that tie to the STEM program?
50:10 So like that type of thing, I think we have some good
50:13 opportunities there where we can try little things and see if
50:18 they are scalable throughout the district.
50:20 So I think I get what you are saying and we’ll try to wordsmith
50:25 something that will get us there.
50:27 I think we’re – the strong language, the absolute language of
50:33 mandate the district implement strategies which will conserve
50:40 all forms of energy used and/or ensure proper recycling.
50:42 We want – I think it would be good to at the same time, you
50:45 know, talk about all the things that we are doing.
50:47 But I’m glad you brought up thinking about the buses because
50:49 there have been some districts that said we’re going to start
50:52 implementing until we get to all electric buses, for example.
50:54 But if you read the news reports that are coming out in recent
50:58 news, it talks about the cost of batteries and all that.
51:00 So we’re – you know, you’re causing as much or more cost as you
51:04 might be saving and maybe even messing up the environment on top
51:09 of it too, worse.
51:09 So I’m not interested in being a guinea pig and we’ll kind of
51:13 let everybody work out the kinks until future boards and
51:16 generations can take a look
51:17 and they’ve got it kind of more perfected on a better for the
51:20 environment, better for the pocketbooks of our taxpayers.
51:23 But I think those – if we can – if you’ve got words that you
51:27 can put in that would not tie us into things that we may not
51:31 want to do
51:31 or maybe bad for the environment or bad for our budget, I would
51:36 appreciate that.
51:37 Or moving it all together, which was your original suggestion.
51:39 I’m fine with that too.
51:41 You know, Ms. Hand, you put together that process for us to go
51:44 to these large – like the one we have on October 12th
51:46 for the Veterans Memorial, you know what I mean, for the
51:50 veterans.
51:50 Maybe there’s a process to do this too that you can think of and
51:52 then we can go there.
51:53 So that’s all.
51:54 Just a thought.
51:55 Okay.
51:56 It doesn’t have to be in the policy but maybe, you know what I
51:58 mean, a review or something every so many years or something.
52:00 Okay.
52:02 I think I can craft something, so.
52:03 Perfect.
52:05 Okay.
52:06 Does anybody else have anything on conservation of natural and
52:08 material resources?
52:08 Nope.
52:09 Moving on.
52:10 7510, use of district facilities.
52:12 Dr. Rendell.
52:13 Yeah.
52:14 So we were going to propose just to leave this policy as is.
52:17 We updated the administrative procedures just last year.
52:20 Okay.
52:21 So we were just going to leave.
52:22 Everybody okay with that?
52:23 Yep.
52:25 Yeah.
52:26 I appreciate that.
52:27 Dr. Rendell, I’m sure as you do your municipality tours, you’ll
52:31 be hearing some, some, some concerns when it comes to some of
52:37 that district use.
52:37 So if you could just put it on your long list of things to ask
52:41 and touch base with as you do those tours, just because I know
52:44 that there’s some concerns that may not necessarily be accurate,
52:49 but it might be a little bit of miscommunication and stuff.
52:50 Yeah, we can try and clear some of that up.
52:52 Absolutely.
52:53 Thank you.
52:54 Yep.
52:55 I think I know some of the things you’re talking about.
52:58 Okay.
52:59 Moving on 7511 media broadcast of student athletic competitions.
53:03 I do know that this is being reviewed currently by our athletic
53:06 department.
53:07 If anybody has anything to kind of mention, but I think I would
53:10 wait until he brings that out to kind of then wordsmith it.
53:13 Okay.
53:14 If you guys are okay with that?
53:15 Yeah.
53:16 All right.
53:17 Okay.
53:18 Moving on to 7530 in lending of board owned equipment.
53:22 We have a new oil policy.
53:24 Dr. Rendell, what’s your, your, your deal?
53:27 Actually, Mr. Cheatham is going to jump in on this one, I think.
53:29 Yeah, this is another cross functional, you think of laptops,
53:32 but you also think about other equipment that we, we lend out
53:36 some equipment we check out, but this is lending.
53:38 And this also I think includes risk management because when
53:41 folks use our facilities and things like that, we’re just making
53:45 sure those, those items don’t go missing or leave our campuses.
53:48 Yeah.
53:49 So we’ll –
53:50 Ms. Sosinski, you have something to say?
53:51 And there’s processes for accounting to make sure that we are
53:55 keeping track of our things.
53:56 So there’s, there’s several, it’s a combined policy that we need
54:02 to work.
54:03 That’s great.
54:04 I have a question and this might just be a technical issue, but
54:07 when I look at our website for this policy, it’s not there.
54:10 7530?
54:11 We do not have that.
54:12 Yeah.
54:13 Okay.
54:14 All right.
54:15 So we’re taking a look at the Neola template, seeing what we
54:17 want to –
54:17 Sorry, I was –
54:18 Adopt.
54:19 Yeah.
54:20 There’s a lot of gray areas there, so I appreciate you guys’
54:23 work on that.
54:23 Anybody else have anything to say?
54:25 So what you guys are saying is you do recommend, I think this is
54:27 the one you did say.
54:28 Yes.
54:29 Oh yeah, we want to adopt something.
54:31 Gotcha.
54:32 Yep.
54:33 And you notice these numbers are starting to cross over.
54:35 So there was like a re-numbering done by Neola at some point.
54:38 Yep.
54:40 Flip in between.
54:41 No further comment.
54:42 We’ll move on to 7530.01.
54:43 Staff use of cell phones, pages, pages, and two-way radios.
54:47 We have a Neola update since this year.
54:49 What is the direction, Dr. Lindell?
54:51 Yeah, so our notice we recommend not to adopt the Neola policy
54:56 to keep ours.
54:57 Okay.
54:58 And it doesn’t have any statutory laws that are to it, so you
55:01 guys are okay with that.
55:02 Wait, I thought you had said to recommend, but not version one,
55:06 version two.
55:06 What are you saying?
55:07 Let me check.
55:08 On the sheet that Russell sent, not to do version one, which was
55:13 the cell phone allowance,
55:13 but to do version two, which is the board-owned wireless
55:17 communications device.
55:18 Correct.
55:19 Because we don’t do cell phone allowances, so we’re not doing
55:22 version one.
55:22 Right.
55:23 And version two will be replacing 7530.01 that we’ll get to next.
55:27 Gotcha.
55:28 Yep.
55:29 With the July updates.
55:30 Correct.
55:31 Okay.
55:32 I wasn’t sure if what you sent us on the email included the July
55:34 updates or not.
55:34 So let me explain.
55:35 So the items that I sent you guys in the educational technology
55:38 Neola templates, there are tons of
55:40 options.
55:41 Right.
55:42 So instead of making you guys go through every single one of
55:44 those options, what I sent you
55:44 guys was our proposed, our recommended selections.
55:46 Yes.
55:47 For each one of those options.
55:48 Right.
55:49 I love that.
55:50 So it kind of streamlined the review of those.
55:51 Yeah.
55:52 So as you look at those, it’s just the options that BPS would
55:55 recommend.
55:55 Right.
55:56 Once you approve those, then we’ll add the BPS language that’s
55:59 specific for our district afterwards.
56:00 Right.
56:01 But that was my question.
56:02 You sent that and it was very helpful.
56:03 Thank you.
56:04 Did that include those July updates?
56:06 It’s the latest version that I have.
56:07 The very latest.
56:08 Okay.
56:10 It probably won’t include the September ones because those just
56:11 came out.
56:11 There were a couple of yours that had the September.
56:12 These change all the time.
56:13 Yeah.
56:14 So it’s technology.
56:15 They’re always changing.
56:16 Right.
56:18 So when you bring it back to us, it’ll have the most.
56:19 Correct.
56:20 Thank you for doing that, by the way.
56:21 So everybody, anybody other comments on this?
56:24 Okay.
56:25 Moving forward, 7540, computer technology and networks.
56:28 Again, that’s Mr. Cheatham.
56:30 So we’ll be replacing this with the NEOLA 7540 template.
56:34 And I provided the recommended changes to you guys.
56:37 Beautiful.
56:38 And thank you for those notes.
56:39 That’s exactly what you said.
56:40 Anybody have any comments on 7540?
56:41 I think we skipped 7530.02.
56:43 That’s what we were just on.
56:46 I thought we were on 7530.01 version two.
56:50 Well, we have.
56:51 So we went to 40 and we’ll get to 40.01.02.03.
56:54 Right.
56:55 Right, right, right.
56:56 Okay.
56:57 And he had just given direction.
56:58 Right, right.
56:59 Well, somewhere in there I missed.
57:00 7540.
57:01 You’re good on that direction.
57:02 We’re going to bring that back.
57:03 Move it to 75.
57:04 I’m not sure where you’re.
57:06 I mean, he had given recommendation that 7540.01, 7540.02.
57:11 We’re not there yet.
57:12 I know we haven’t gotten there yet.
57:14 We’re on 7530.
57:15 Right, 7530.
57:16 If you.
57:17 Yeah, yeah.
57:18 So we have 7530.01 which we went.
57:21 And he said that he was going to work on tying that into 7530,
57:24 right.
57:25 He had mentioned that he’s going to bring back Neola template 7530.01.
57:28 He went through that.
57:29 Yeah, so 7530.01 will be replaced by the Neola template 7530.01
57:34 version two.
57:34 Right.
57:35 And you don’t have a 7530.02.
57:38 Right.
57:39 Well, I didn’t hear the recommendation for that.
57:41 So we, we need, you’re recommending that we add 7530.02.
57:46 Correct.
57:49 Which is going to replace, gotcha.
57:50 Okay.
57:51 Yeah.
57:52 Sorry, I just, nobody, I didn’t hear .02.
57:53 No, no, I appreciate it.
57:54 No, you’re right.
57:55 Any time you need clarification, just let me know.
57:57 7540, Computer Technology and Networks, Dr. Rendell.
58:01 - Again, that’s Russell.
58:03 - We’ll be replacing that with the Neola template
58:05 and I sent you guys the recommended changes.
58:07 - Yep, you got that inside of here.
58:08 - It got rid of MySpace.
58:10 - Needed a little update.
58:13 - I don’t know why it might come back.
58:14 - Right, oh yeah, do we have pagers?
58:18 - It still says pagers, yes it does.
58:19 - Do pagers still exist?
58:20 - My note on this one is that on 7540,
58:23 there are a lot of administrative procedures
58:26 and I would request that we check them
58:28 for accuracy and relevance because a lot of them
58:30 are quite old and in the world of technology.
58:32 - So what we hope to do is approve the Neola policies
58:35 and then we’ll go back through the administrative procedures
58:37 to make sure they match the changes.
58:38 - Right, match them up.
58:39 - Okay, and I’m fine with deleting MySpace.
58:42 - I don’t know, just for nostalgia.
58:45 I mean, you never know it might be used.
58:46 Now it’s not gonna be covered.
58:48 Now somebody will jump on it.
58:50 All right, 7540.01 Technology Privacy, Mr. Cheatham.
58:55 - Yep, we are replacing that with the Neola template.
58:58 - 7540.01, anybody have any comments on that?
59:00 - Nope. - Nope, all right.
59:02 Moving on to 7540.02 District webpage, Mr. Cheatham.
59:06 - We are replacing that.
59:08 It has a new name, Web Content Apps and Services,
59:11 7540.02, the Neola template.
59:14 And again, I sent you guys the BPS recommendations.
59:17 - Yes you did. - Yep.
59:18 Anybody have any comments on the district webpage component?
59:21 - I noticed that the, I don’t think this is included in your,
59:26 the updates that you did the checkbox,
59:27 but the July and September updates included the list
59:31 of prohibited sites and apps that the DOE puts out,
59:35 and specifically mentions TikTok.
59:37 So those are things we’ll need to update as they updated that
59:41 in the most recent rulemaking.
59:43 And that was, I won’t say, I won’t just repeat it,
59:45 but it was in .03, .04, and then I think in 7544,
59:51 that any of those that talk about that, that–
59:54 - The TikTok. - They gave that particular,
59:56 you know, list, you know, check the list, you know,
59:59 so that way we don’t have to keep updating it.
1:00:00 But they did specifically say TikTok,
1:00:02 so I’m assuming they’re not thinking
1:00:04 they’re gonna take that off the list.
1:00:06 But we wanna make sure we include that language too.
1:00:08 - We’ll reference the state rule when we make the update.
1:00:10 - Right, right.
1:00:11 - So we’re good with that?
1:00:15 All right, moving on, 7540.03 student network
1:00:19 and internet acceptability and use and safety.
1:00:21 Mr. Cheatham?
1:00:22 - We are using the Neola template with changes sent.
1:00:27 - Yep, you guys noticed.
1:00:28 He’s put all these notes inside there.
1:00:30 If there’s any comments you guys have.
1:00:32 - And the staff, when the next one’s–
1:00:34 - Yep, same thing, I just need to move through it.
1:00:37 All right, next up, 7540.04 staff, adult network,
1:00:40 and internet acceptable use and safety.
1:00:44 Mr. Cheatham?
1:00:45 - Adopting the Neola template
1:00:48 with the changes sent to the board.
1:00:50 - Yep, anybody had any conversation on that?
1:00:53 Hearing none, move on.
1:00:55 7540.05 electronic mail.
1:00:58 Mr. Cheatham?
1:01:00 - This was renamed by a Neola district issued staff email
1:01:04 accounts
1:01:04 and we are recommending to adopt the Neola template.
1:01:07 - Any comments on that?
1:01:10 - Mm-hmm.
1:01:11 - All right, moving forward.
1:01:12 Internet filtering first policy, 7540.06, Dr. Rendell?
1:01:17 - It’s the same thing as all Mr. Cheatham here.
1:01:20 - Yep. - Next.
1:01:21 - We’re gonna renumber, we’re gonna keep this policy,
1:01:24 but we need to renumber it because Neola has a different policy
1:01:26 in this server. - Sure.
1:01:27 - So we will renumber this policy and submit it.
1:01:29 - So you’re gonna renumber it?
1:01:30 - Correct. - Any comments on that?
1:01:32 - No, I recommend it remain as is,
1:01:34 just with a different number?
1:01:36 - Correct.
1:01:37 - Okay, that’s, I mean, I didn’t see any problems with it,
1:01:39 unless the, is that statute still named that CEPA?
1:01:44 The Children’s Internet?
1:01:45 - Yes.
1:01:46 Okay, thank you.
1:01:47 - Okay, 75.
1:01:48 - And I believe this was in an internal written policy,
1:01:51 so we just need to renumber it because it was internal.
1:01:53 We gave it our own number, but Neola used the number.
1:01:55 - Gotcha.
1:01:56 - All right, moving on, 7540.07,
1:02:01 network change management policy.
1:02:03 I’m assuming this is Mr. Keatham.
1:02:06 - It’s a BPS policy.
1:02:07 - It is.
1:02:08 - BPS policy that we wanna keep in place.
1:02:11 - You wanna keep it in place, don’t see any updates.
1:02:14 There’s no Neola updates, we’re good to go.
1:02:16 Does anybody have any comments on that?
1:02:17 - I’m good with just marking it as reviewed.
1:02:19 - All right.
1:02:21 Moving on, 7540.08,
1:02:22 mobile computing device assignment and use.
1:02:25 Mr. Cheatham.
1:02:25 - Remove policy.
1:02:28 It’s covered in 7530.01, 7540.03,
1:02:32 and 7540.04 covers this policy,
1:02:35 so we’re removing this one.
1:02:37 - Are we all good with moving to the other policies?
1:02:39 - Uh-huh.
1:02:40 - All right.
1:02:41 - Yeah, I just had a note that on this one,
1:02:43 on 7540.10, 7540.12, and on 7540.13,
1:02:48 they’ve got some administrative procedures
1:02:51 that if still relevant, need to be put in wherever
1:02:55 they need to go because it seemed like
1:02:56 they were important information,
1:02:58 as long as they’re updated.
1:02:59 - Got it.
1:03:01 - Good point, Ms. Campbell.
1:03:02 Next up, it’d be 7540.09,
1:03:04 District IT Incident Response Policy.
1:03:08 Mr. Keatham.
1:03:09 - This is a BPS policy,
1:03:10 and we would like to keep it in place,
1:03:12 but we will be making some revisions.
1:03:14 - Thank you.
1:03:15 Anybody have any comments on that?
1:03:17 - Oh, hang on.
1:03:20 Are we, what number?
1:03:22 - 7540.09, District IT Incident Response Policy.
1:03:25 - Nine, gotcha.
1:03:25 Sorry, I was jumping on.
1:03:26 - No, that’s okay.
1:03:27 - I’m good.
1:03:30 - Okay, anybody else?
1:03:31 Hearing none, let’s move on to 7540.10,
1:03:34 District Web Services Policy.
1:03:36 Assuming that’s Mr. Cheatham.
1:03:38 - Yes, it is.
1:03:39 We would like to remove this policy.
1:03:41 These items are covered in 7540.02.
1:03:43 - Okay, anybody else wish to speak to that?
1:03:47 Have any problem with that?
1:03:48 Good.
1:03:49 All right, moving on.
1:03:50 7540.11, Electronic Data Confidentiality.
1:03:55 - We would like to keep this in place.
1:03:56 - Keep it in place.
1:03:57 It seems that, anybody else have any comments on it?
1:04:00 There may be some revisions,
1:04:01 but we want to keep the policy in place.
1:04:03 - Yeah, I’m good with it as is,
1:04:05 unless they have a recommendation.
1:04:07 - Okay, hearing nobody else.
1:04:10 7540.12, Network Access from Personally Owned Computers
1:04:14 and Other Web-Enabled Devices.
1:04:17 Assuming that’s what you’re doing again.
1:04:19 - We’re gonna replace this policy.
1:04:20 It is covered in 7530.02.
1:04:23 - Okay, does anybody wish to speak to this policy at all
1:04:25 before it gets revised and sent over?
1:04:27 - All right, moving on.
1:04:30 7540.13, Utilization of the District’s website.
1:04:33 Mr. Cheatham.
1:04:35 - We’re replacing this policy, but 7543.
1:04:39 - Okay, anybody have a problem
1:04:41 with him replacing this policy?
1:04:43 7543, all right, moving on.
1:04:46 7542, Access to District Technology
1:04:50 or Resources from Wireless Communications Devices.
1:04:53 Dr. Rendell.
1:04:55 - It’s me as well.
1:04:56 - Mr. Cheatham, one more time.
1:04:57 - We’re recommending to adopt the NEOLA template.
1:05:01 If the board, as the board members review it,
1:05:03 some of these policies, they cover a lot of social media
1:05:05 and things that we’ve been talking about as a district
1:05:07 for quite some time.
1:05:08 So if you have any changes or any concerns,
1:05:10 please let me know as we’re updating it.
1:05:13 - Perfect.
1:05:13 Anybody have any comments on this?
1:05:16 Gonna bring forward the NEOLA template with some changes
1:05:18 and move forward with it.
1:05:20 All right.
1:05:22 Next up, 7543, Utilization of the District’s Website
1:05:24 and Remote Access to the District’s Network.
1:05:27 Mr. Cheatham.
1:05:28 - Adopting NEOLA’s template, and again,
1:05:30 with our remote work policies and things like that,
1:05:32 I just ask the board to pay close attention
1:05:34 and any concerns that you have for that,
1:05:36 just send our way and we’ll address them.
1:05:39 - Okay, all right.
1:05:41 That is the last of the policies that we have.
1:05:43 - There’s three more. - 7544.
1:05:45 - Hang on a second.
1:05:46 - Two more, actually.
1:05:47 - Use of social media.
1:05:53 - Oh, there we go.
1:05:53 I’m so sorry, guys.
1:05:55 Use of social media, 7544.
1:05:58 - We’re gonna adopt the NEOLA template.
1:06:00 And again, just because it’s a hot topic,
1:06:02 as you guys review it,
1:06:03 anything you see that you’re concerned with,
1:06:05 let me know and we’ll make sure
1:06:06 to incorporate that into the policy.
1:06:09 - Yeah, I did have a question on this one.
1:06:14 Because I was looking at the options that you selected,
1:06:18 and it looked like down,
1:06:21 I’m gonna try to get the update,
1:06:25 I can’t get them pulled up fast enough.
1:06:28 In the one, there was, down at the bottom it said,
1:06:33 like, pick 9, 10, 11, or 12, or something like that.
1:06:36 You marked 11 and 12, which was the part,
1:06:41 it’s towards the bottom, employee use of personal
1:06:43 communication devices that work for social media.
1:06:45 The first one says, they’re permitted to use personal
1:06:49 communication devices to access social media
1:06:50 for personal use during breaks and mealtimes.
1:06:52 And then the second one says, they can use it during work hours,
1:06:55 provided it does not interfere with employees job performance.
1:06:58 So, Neola had suggested that that’s a, you do this or do that.
1:07:02 So, I didn’t know, because I’m, seems like you don’t really need,
1:07:08 if you’re gonna do the second, you didn’t really need to do the
1:07:11 first.
1:07:12 But I don’t know if there was.
1:07:14 They kind of say the same thing.
1:07:17 So, if the board had a preference, that’s kind of why I selected
1:07:19 both of them.
1:07:19 If the board had a preference, I’m fine with either one.
1:07:22 Basically, it’s saying that employees can use it either on their
1:07:25 free time or time
1:07:26 where they’re not involved with instruction.
1:07:29 The first one’s just more, it’s more specific during breaks and
1:07:33 mealtimes.
1:07:34 The second one is just saying when, kind of free time.
1:07:37 So, it’s less specific.
1:07:38 Right.
1:07:39 But if the board had an opinion on one or the other, that’s why
1:07:42 I selected both.
1:07:43 But if you don’t, I’ll pick one and move forward.
1:07:46 Okay.
1:07:47 Do you guys have an opinion?
1:07:49 I’m just, go ahead.
1:07:52 Ms. Jenkins.
1:07:53 I don’t feel strongly either way.
1:07:55 But I think it’s better to just do the more broad and
1:07:58 generalized one.
1:07:59 Because when you create policies that you can’t really manage,
1:08:03 I think that’s kind of ineffective.
1:08:04 I mean, when you have secondary schools where people have all
1:08:07 different times
1:08:07 throughout the day when they’re free, the reality of managing
1:08:11 that is impossible.
1:08:12 Yeah.
1:08:13 Proving that you had free time and you weren’t engaged in
1:08:15 instruction is a lot easier.
1:08:17 Right.
1:08:18 I mean, I guess the difference between the first option and the
1:08:21 second option is,
1:08:23 you know, are we going to say that a teacher on a planning
1:08:26 period can’t use her planning time
1:08:28 or his planning time to log onto Facebook and check their thing?
1:08:31 I mean, because that’s not technically a break.
1:08:33 Right.
1:08:34 That’s work hours.
1:08:35 I don’t know that I’m ready to jump on that because they’re
1:08:38 planning time.
1:08:39 If they waste it on social media, then that’s their choice.
1:08:42 They’ll still have to do the work.
1:08:44 I was just trying to think of where it might – I was trying to
1:08:48 think outside.
1:08:48 We always think about teachers.
1:08:49 I was trying to think outside of the classroom.
1:08:51 But if we have that in there, it doesn’t interfere with the
1:08:53 employee’s job performance.
1:08:55 You know, if you’re a bathroom monitor.
1:08:57 Right.
1:08:58 So I could leave it broad or I can try to list more things in
1:09:01 option number one.
1:09:02 But, you know, as I list them, I’m always going to – something’s
1:09:05 going to be missed
1:09:05 or something’s going to come up.
1:09:06 So –
1:09:07 Right.
1:09:08 Well, I just didn’t want them to conflict.
1:09:10 And I guess they don’t conflict.
1:09:11 They just – the second one kind of adds more onto it.
1:09:13 Yeah, I think option 12 or the second one we’re referring to is
1:09:17 probably safer.
1:09:18 Okay.
1:09:19 Because, again, with option 11 or 9, depending on which page you’re
1:09:23 looking at,
1:09:23 it just says breaks and mealtimes.
1:09:25 Yeah.
1:09:26 And what’s a break?
1:09:27 Right.
1:09:28 You know?
1:09:29 Yeah.
1:09:30 And we have different groups of employees who have different
1:09:34 types of schedules and things like that.
1:09:36 So –
1:09:37 Yeah.
1:09:38 Yeah, Mrs. Jenkins is right.
1:09:39 The day of an elementary teacher is much different than the day
1:09:42 of a secondary teacher.
1:09:42 So defining what a break is and mealtime and –
1:09:47 Right.
1:09:48 And next time we do this – again, this is the first time, but I’ll
1:09:51 include the numbers
1:09:53 so it’s a little bit more clear which option was selected on
1:09:55 each one of these.
1:09:56 I apologize for that.
1:09:57 Yeah, yeah.
1:09:58 I was having to bounce back and forth a little bit to see –
1:09:59 The other thing is it doesn’t necessarily apply just to teachers.
1:10:02 It’s all of our employees.
1:10:03 Right.
1:10:04 So as long as it doesn’t interfere with your job performance, I
1:10:07 guess, is –
1:10:09 Yeah.
1:10:10 Okay.
1:10:11 One other question for the board.
1:10:12 In a lot of the NEOLA templates, it says it charges the
1:10:14 superintendent.
1:10:15 But in some of them, it says a superintendent or a designee.
1:10:17 Do you guys have a preference on that?
1:10:19 Or can I just work with Dr. Bundell to figure out what’s the
1:10:22 best approach?
1:10:23 According to the definitions, capital S, superintendent implies
1:10:27 designee.
1:10:28 Okay.
1:10:29 Yes.
1:10:30 So good on 75-44?
1:10:31 Yeah.
1:10:32 Good.
1:10:33 Everybody good?
1:10:34 All right.
1:10:35 Moving on to 75-50, joint use of facilities.
1:10:37 There’s some notes in here to move it to 810.
1:10:40 75-50 is mine.
1:10:41 I looked at 8100, and that’s the NEOLA template.
1:10:46 75-50 is a Brevard policy.
1:10:48 And I think 8100 is really the better approach.
1:10:51 Yeah.
1:10:52 So my suggestion would be to delete this policy.
1:10:54 I’ll take a look at 8100, make sure it incorporates this.
1:10:57 I believe it does.
1:10:58 There’s a paragraph that talks about joint facilities.
1:11:01 So that’s my suggestion is we delete 75-50 and just incorporate
1:11:05 what we need in 8100.
1:11:07 Okay.
1:11:09 Yeah.
1:11:10 And I wanted to take a second and thank Ms. Hand.
1:11:12 We went to the Space Coast League of Cities last night and went
1:11:15 through all of the – we
1:11:16 met with the mayors and everybody else and spoke to our plan to
1:11:19 visit the cities.
1:11:20 Right now, as we speak, an email is going out to all the mayors,
1:11:23 the city managers, and
1:11:25 city clerks to establish those meetings.
1:11:27 And we should be on the road here pretty quick.
1:11:29 It was well-received.
1:11:30 And I want to say thank you to Ms. Hand.
1:11:32 Interlocal agreements and facility uses is one of the hot topics
1:11:35 that they were speaking to.
1:11:36 Some of them had brought up they would like to create satellite
1:11:40 locations for adult ed.
1:11:42 And the fact that they could – they said that they could put 30
1:11:45 people, but they just can’t –
1:11:46 those 30 people could make it to that area, but not make it all
1:11:49 the way to the other area.
1:11:50 So there’s going to be some really, really interesting
1:11:52 conversations that wrap around some of these meetings.
1:11:55 We were approached by some people from the community that were
1:11:58 saying things about supporting students.
1:12:00 I think it’s going to be a great thing.
1:12:01 So I want to say thank you, Ms. Hand.
1:12:03 We had that policy.
1:12:04 So with that, I think we’re in a good spot to move towards the
1:12:08 next part of our agenda, which is to discuss public comment.
1:12:12 And I think I’m going to give the floor to Ms. Campbell, who
1:12:15 wishes to speak on this topic.
1:12:17 And then we can go from there.
1:12:19 Thank you.
1:12:20 Yeah, I did some more – if anybody in the public was confused
1:12:24 by the description, it’s the public – it’s not a public
1:12:29 speaking bill 1069, but it’s the public speaking aspect of how
1:12:33 that impacts us as a board.
1:12:35 Did some more thinking, talking, listening, soul searching, and
1:12:42 I have – you know, I’m still going to put my suggestion on the
1:12:47 table of just, you know, cutting off the cameras for the live
1:12:52 stream specifically for all public comment, just so we’re
1:12:55 treating everybody the same.
1:12:56 But then we would record it and to post it separately with
1:12:58 content warnings as necessary.
1:13:00 So we would always have those.
1:13:01 And I think staff does a really good job of uploading things
1:13:03 really fast.
1:13:04 I think we’re talking about like a day turnaround.
1:13:06 We’re not talking about a week before they get posted, but, you
1:13:10 know, just something – they should be up there quickly.
1:13:12 So I think because that – that just gives us the – we’re going
1:13:15 to treat everybody the same, but this content might come out
1:13:18 there.
1:13:19 So – but there is another option that I would – if we could do
1:13:24 that, and I think this is where – Mr. Trent, I appreciate you
1:13:28 taking into consideration.
1:13:29 You mentioned the other night about, you know, separate agenda
1:13:32 and non-agenda again like we had before because of the changes.
1:13:35 I actually think we – maybe we could have a – I very much
1:13:38 appreciated your point of it’s not just the broadcast.
1:13:42 It’s who’s in the room because we also have children and
1:13:45 students, other, you know, teenage students who attend
1:13:50 frequently.
1:13:50 We want them to attend.
1:13:51 We encourage them, and we love to hear them speak even when they’re
1:13:53 not happy.
1:13:54 It’s students advocating for themselves and for their peers, and
1:13:57 I appreciate that.
1:13:58 So that point was well taken, and so I wondered if we might have
1:14:05 – rather than agenda, non-agenda, because sometimes these will
1:14:07 be on an agenda,
1:14:08 but if we can put the book challenge process or someone who’s
1:14:11 going to come to do that, that part at the end, and we don’t
1:14:15 have it live streamed,
1:14:16 but we record it for posterity, and anybody who wants to see it,
1:14:19 and we post it, but that we have that conversation towards the
1:14:23 end,
1:14:23 because then we don’t have – we don’t run the risk of exposing
1:14:26 not just the broadcast audience,
1:14:28 but our in-house audience to content that we might not want them
1:14:33 to be exposed to.
1:14:35 And again, I like these FCC rules.
1:14:38 I think they’re important, and I don’t want to put that out just
1:14:42 for my own level of comfort.
1:14:44 And it’s not just – I know when we think about these things, we
1:14:47 think specifically about the explicit sexual content,
1:14:50 but I have to go back to my statement that I made the other
1:14:53 night, which is there may be things that we don’t want to
1:14:55 broadcast
1:14:56 that don’t rise to the level – or sink to the level – of
1:15:00 prohibited content.
1:15:02 They don’t sink to the level of that sexually graphic explicit
1:15:04 material,
1:15:05 but we still don’t want them going out over our airwaves in a
1:15:08 live broad stream.
1:15:09 So that is where my mind continues to go back to.
1:15:12 So whatever the board would like to consider, you know, but I do
1:15:18 want to put both those out there.
1:15:20 One, that we just cut them off.
1:15:21 And I talked to Dr. Rendell about that when I first had this
1:15:23 concern last week,
1:15:24 and I suggested that might be a good idea just to have – just
1:15:29 in general to have them off while we’re doing it and post them.
1:15:33 Or – but I would also suggest that maybe we could do that, have
1:15:36 it in as a separate section.
1:15:38 But again, the non-agenda agenda thing won’t necessarily help
1:15:42 because we will have these.
1:15:43 If we do the policy change that we were talking about a month
1:15:46 ago, then they will be an agenda item,
1:15:48 and that doesn’t solve that problem.
1:15:50 Okay, so if I can clarify, Ms. Campbell, you’re trying to
1:15:55 discuss moving public comment to be recorded and not go live.
1:16:00 And I’m also hearing you say that there may be an opportunity
1:16:03 where, in relation to book challenge material and conversations,
1:16:08 we would separate that to the end.
1:16:10 And would we record those also?
1:16:13 Oh, yeah.
1:16:14 Would be your recommendation?
1:16:15 Okay.
1:16:16 So you would have two recordings if anybody was to speak to book
1:16:18 challenges.
1:16:19 It would be kind of like a, okay, you have this, you have public
1:16:22 comment.
1:16:23 And anybody that comes in, unless it’s on the agenda, like you
1:16:25 said, we would move it to the afterwards
1:16:28 and record that also and have two recordings.
1:16:30 No, I’m making – well, maybe I should have made one suggestion
1:16:34 at a time.
1:16:35 It’s either/or.
1:16:36 Okay.
1:16:37 My first suggestion was, if the board will go with me, is that
1:16:41 we stop live streaming the public comments.
1:16:44 We just record them and put them on later, whether there’s a
1:16:46 book challenge process in there or not.
1:16:48 That would be my first suggestion, that we just don’t record it.
1:16:52 The sec – if we’re not willing to do that, my second suggestion
1:16:56 was, because of Mr. Trent’s point of people in the room, right,
1:16:59 we’ve got to consider the audience in the room as well, that we
1:17:02 move all book challenges, whether on agenda or not agenda, to
1:17:07 the end.
1:17:09 And part of that is going to require that, I think – there’s no
1:17:15 – how – you know, we’ve looked at the law and it says
1:17:18 challenge material.
1:17:19 What – somebody could get up there and start reading, we don’t
1:17:21 know.
1:17:21 And here’s – here’s why I think this is so important, because
1:17:25 this is putting all of the weight and the decision-making on one
1:17:29 person on the board, to – of the work that we’ve done in policy
1:17:34 and whatever.
1:17:35 And again, not – we’re thinking – we always think about the
1:17:38 sexually explicit material, but there’s so many other things
1:17:40 that we don’t want to – I wouldn’t want to be broadcast.
1:17:41 And we’re putting all the weight on the chair, because they’re
1:17:44 the one who’s going to make the call, of not knowing – of
1:17:47 knowing whether this is one of the books or whatever.
1:17:49 So we need to refine that either way to confirm that this is a
1:17:52 book that’s being challenged, or is it even a book that’s on our
1:17:56 shelves?
1:17:57 Is it a book – I’ve had some people say, oh, you still have it.
1:17:59 I’m like, no, we do not have it.
1:18:01 But they’re still looking at an old reference of where it is.
1:18:04 So I’m trying not – I’m sorry that I’m mixing some kind of
1:18:08 things, but I really feel like either/or is what I’m looking at,
1:18:13 Mr. Seusson.
1:18:14 Okay.
1:18:15 I will say, just for a point of clarification, I have no problem
1:18:19 issuing and controlling the board’s decision when these are
1:18:23 coming up.
1:18:24 Like, that’s not an issue at all for me.
1:18:25 So if that’s ever kind of the weight of it and everything else,
1:18:27 I’ve never felt the weight of it.
1:18:29 I have no problem identifying the books that are being
1:18:31 challenged.
1:18:32 I have no problem doing all that stuff.
1:18:34 But I will clarify for you that Ms. Campbell would like to, one,
1:18:38 make the recommendation to move, not to record live.
1:18:41 And two, in the event that there’s book challenges and stuff
1:18:45 like that, you’d like to have that possibly separated.
1:18:48 And then there was also a third component which said that we
1:18:52 would like to have a, hey, if this is a book that you wish to
1:18:55 speak to, then please notify the book.
1:18:57 And if it’s being challenged or not, I’m okay with that
1:19:00 component of it.
1:19:01 That would be nice to know ahead of time.
1:19:03 But those are the three things to discuss.
1:19:05 So I’ll leave the floor open if anybody wishes to discuss it.
1:19:08 Anybody have any comments on it?
1:19:10 Ms. Jenkins.
1:19:12 So, Mr. Gibbs, I have a couple of questions first.
1:19:15 Yep.
1:19:16 Legal questions.
1:19:18 So if we decided to leave it as it was, and if we had one
1:19:24 meeting where, you know,
1:19:26 clearly it’s abused, and then we decide meetings forward to
1:19:32 change it, does that put us in legal jeopardy because it’s
1:19:37 obvious that we’re changing it because of the behavior that was
1:19:41 displayed?
1:19:42 As I said at the meeting, I think you could potentially run into
1:19:45 a claim for viewpoint discrimination if you’re only impacting
1:19:50 book review type material.
1:19:53 That’s something I would want to look at with the case law out
1:19:56 there to see if there’s any possible guidance on it.
1:19:58 If the decision is, hey, you know, we’re just going to cut
1:20:01 public comment, I don’t think so because everybody that’s
1:20:04 providing public comment is treated the same.
1:20:07 Okay.
1:20:08 So everybody would be non-live streamed and recorded and posted.
1:20:13 Okay.
1:20:14 My other legal question would be, are we going to put ourselves
1:20:21 into a legal question if we don’t do agenda, non-agenda, but we
1:20:28 do just book challenges separately?
1:20:30 That would go back to, if you’re moving, if you just moved them
1:20:34 to the end of the meeting and live streamed them, then you’d
1:20:37 probably be okay.
1:20:37 That’s separating agenda versus there, but could someone make
1:20:41 out a claim?
1:20:42 They could argue it, I think that you’d be on firmer ground
1:20:46 saying we’re just controlling our agenda by moving those toward
1:20:50 the end of the meeting if someone wants to do that.
1:20:52 Okay.
1:20:53 So I needed to ask those questions before I formulate my final
1:20:59 opinion here, but I get where you’re going, Ms. Campbell, with
1:21:04 putting the book challenges at the end.
1:21:05 My concern is that’s going to be a lawsuit waiting to happen
1:21:09 where even if we’re on firmer ground, it’s not concrete.
1:21:13 And it would concern me that someone would say if we’re only
1:21:17 putting book challenges in one area that we’re classifying those
1:21:21 when we shouldn’t be versus when we had agenda versus non-agenda,
1:21:24 because we’re not required to do non-agenda.
1:21:26 So if we’re going to do that, I think it has to be one or the
1:21:28 other.
1:21:29 And I’m not saying I’m for or against it either way.
1:21:31 I just, that’s just my concern legally.
1:21:34 When it comes to live or recorded, so originally when we had
1:21:40 these conversations about cutting the camera, I was always
1:21:46 against it because I think it fell into the trap of lack of
1:21:50 transparency for the community.
1:21:53 But if we’re recording it, because that wasn’t part of the
1:21:56 conversation last time, then my concern goes away.
1:21:59 I don’t, I don’t see the difference.
1:22:01 It doesn’t really matter if it’s live or it’s recorded.
1:22:03 And I guess my question would be we posted immediately after the
1:22:07 live’s over.
1:22:08 So I don’t, and someone, someone in GCR might yell at me and
1:22:11 tell me this is impossible, but I don’t see why we can’t post
1:22:14 the recorded right away too.
1:22:16 I don’t know why there would be a huge lapse.
1:22:18 So if, again, I would like to know the answer to that question,
1:22:24 because if that’s, if that’s true, if it could literally get
1:22:26 posted right after the meeting, then I have no problem with that.
1:22:29 I mean, I don’t, I don’t see the concern there at all.
1:22:32 The other thing too that I think is important for the public to
1:22:39 be aware is this bill isn’t necessarily saying that parents have
1:22:44 the right to read the passages aloud and be stopped at a board
1:22:47 meeting.
1:22:47 It has nothing to do with that.
1:22:49 It’s the bill is intentionally written broadly, like every other
1:22:52 piece of legislation that has come through in the past two years
1:22:54 so that it can be manipulated and or put in the hands of other
1:22:58 people to make these decisions and create the ramifications.
1:23:02 And so what the bill is saying is that parents have a right to
1:23:06 have access to the, to the book, whether it be electronic or in
1:23:11 hand and read it if it was objected, which makes sense.
1:23:15 So you’re not hiding the content that has been, has been objected
1:23:19 to.
1:23:19 Um, but it has already been abused in other counties to be used
1:23:23 a different way.
1:23:24 And that wasn’t the intention, in my opinion, when you read it,
1:23:28 but there’s nothing stopping them from getting away from that
1:23:30 legally.
1:23:31 Correct Mr. Gibbs, because it’s just broad.
1:23:34 You can read it in numerous ways.
1:23:36 And that’s where the attorneys have come down is like, well, we
1:23:39 read it this way.
1:23:40 But the plain definition of to read is either read to yourself
1:23:45 or read out loud.
1:23:47 So if your public comment period allows non agenda topics, they
1:23:52 can come and read it out loud over their three minutes.
1:23:56 And if you stop them based on the plain language in the rule,
1:24:00 then you’re supposed to stop use of that material.
1:24:03 Yeah.
1:24:04 So the reason I bring that up is just for the public because it’s,
1:24:08 because we’re talking about it one way, the way it would be
1:24:11 abused.
1:24:11 I just want the public to be aware of that’s, that’s the way it
1:24:14 would be abused.
1:24:15 That’s not what it, I, at least I don’t think the main intention
1:24:19 was here.
1:24:20 The intention was so parents had access to those books that were
1:24:22 being challenged.
1:24:23 And they had a right to access those books.
1:24:26 So I just want the public to be aware.
1:24:28 This isn’t a law that the state created intentionally for
1:24:30 parents to come read at the podium and we’re trying to circumvent
1:24:33 in any way.
1:24:34 And then I said this last time, but I’ll say it again.
1:24:37 I’m, I’m not concerned about the burden it puts on one person.
1:24:41 I just think it’s inappropriate that one person makes that
1:24:45 decision for the entire district.
1:24:47 Uh, I think that’s the whole point of the policy and the
1:24:49 committee that we had put in place.
1:24:51 Um, especially when it’s the consequence of a very broadly
1:24:55 written law that has nothing to do with that exact scenario.
1:24:59 So I, I would be most in favor for leaving it alone.
1:25:05 And if it’s abuse changing it, I’m just concerned about the
1:25:08 legal ramifications if we do that.
1:25:10 Um, because then the only solution would be changing it to
1:25:14 agenda, not agenda then, according to what I just asked.
1:25:17 If someone else has a different clarification or question, um, I’m
1:25:20 most in favor for that.
1:25:22 Okay.
1:25:23 Um, let, let the public react to this law.
1:25:26 And if they choose to react a certain way and we, as a board
1:25:29 choose to respond to it, I think that’s the appropriate thing to
1:25:31 do.
1:25:31 Um, but I’m also not against, um, that’s my number one choice,
1:25:36 but I’m not against Ms. Campbell’s choice of recording it as
1:25:40 long as it’s posted exactly when the live meeting is posted,
1:25:43 which again, I don’t understand why we can’t do that.
1:25:45 Um, that way there’s, there’s no delay and there’s as little
1:25:48 conflict as possible.
1:25:50 Um, so I’m hearing you say that you’re okay to move to not
1:25:54 record them live only if they can be released fairly shortly
1:25:59 after the meeting.
1:26:01 Is that true?
1:26:04 Okay.
1:26:05 I don’t need clarification.
1:26:06 What I said, so I’m going to say it again because I don’t want
1:26:09 it to get misinterpreted.
1:26:10 My number one choice is to let it be.
1:26:13 But if it’s abused, I expect this board to have a conversation
1:26:18 about.
1:26:18 the response to that, because I would hope that this board, like
1:26:23 Ms. Campbell said, respects that that’s not why this law was
1:26:28 written.
1:26:29 To be abused that way.
1:26:30 To ban books off of our shelves.
1:26:32 And I hope this board would respect the policy that they created
1:26:34 themselves and the committee they created themselves and the
1:26:37 people they appointed to the committee.
1:26:39 Um, to have that conversation if it’s abused.
1:26:42 That’s my number one priority.
1:26:44 My second choice would be to record it and post it immediately
1:26:48 with the live stream.
1:26:50 Okay.
1:26:51 Thank you.
1:26:52 Ms. Jenkins.
1:26:53 Is anybody on over here?
1:26:54 Mr. Trump.
1:26:55 I think it’s good.
1:26:56 Um, I believe we need to continue with the conversation of, um,
1:27:02 first choice, second choice.
1:27:08 Yes.
1:27:09 I guess we could leave it alone.
1:27:10 Um, I’ve always been a fan of splitting the public comment of
1:27:16 agenda, non agenda, agenda items.
1:27:20 Um, and then the not recording, you know, not live streaming of
1:27:24 the non agenda items.
1:27:25 Um, Ms. Campbell, it’s it correct.
1:27:27 It’s going to be on the agenda at some point books.
1:27:30 And, um, the good thing about that.
1:27:33 I don’t believe it’ll be meeting after meeting, um, that it’ll
1:27:36 be on the agenda.
1:27:37 So maybe at that point we would, uh, you know, fall back on the
1:27:42 chair to take charge of that one.
1:27:45 Um, if we leave it the same way, um, I, I think we know which
1:27:51 way.
1:27:52 I, I think I know how the public comments going to go.
1:27:55 Um, and we just be discussing this again at another time.
1:27:59 Um, if we, if we leave it.
1:28:01 Um, so I’m for splitting, um, public comment.
1:28:06 And just off the top of my head, I think that would be wise.
1:28:09 I mean, we, we have work to do.
1:28:11 We have to govern and, you know, we’ve seen meetings where, and
1:28:13 you’ve seen longer meetings than me,
1:28:15 um, where it’s just by the time we get down to doing what we’re
1:28:19 supposed to be doing.
1:28:21 It’s, it’s, it’s way into the evening and, and, um, uh, that’s
1:28:25 unfortunate.
1:28:26 So, um, I just think it would be a better way to run our
1:28:28 meetings, but that’s just, that’s just my two cents there.
1:28:32 So you’re suggesting a third option.
1:28:34 Well, you kind of had that, didn’t you?
1:28:37 And Ms. Jenkins mentioned it too, about the, uh, this is where
1:28:40 we can discuss it.
1:28:40 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
1:28:41 This is where we can discuss it.
1:28:42 Well, I guess, could you just clarify, do you just want to
1:28:44 separate it, but you don’t want to stop the live stream?
1:28:47 I, I, I, on non-agenda items, I would stop the live stream.
1:28:50 You would?
1:28:50 Yeah.
1:28:51 Okay, sorry.
1:28:52 I couldn’t hear you.
1:28:53 No, it’s fine.
1:28:54 It’s just working.
1:28:55 So, so yeah, I, I, I think that’s the same as Ms. Campbell.
1:28:58 I thought it was.
1:28:59 But not recording.
1:29:00 Recording and playing later?
1:29:02 Yeah, I don’t mind if it’s recorded.
1:29:04 I think, I think people need to hear it if they want to hear it.
1:29:06 Right.
1:29:07 You know, it’s.
1:29:08 But it wouldn’t be live streamed.
1:29:09 Not, not live streamed.
1:29:10 Okay.
1:29:11 I mean, I think that would stop.
1:29:12 And it really isn’t about who’s speaking, what, when, I just don’t
1:29:16 think it’s necessary.
1:29:17 Um, I mean, if, if, if the op, the objective for public comment
1:29:21 is to get us to hear something,
1:29:23 then they’re, they’re achieving it.
1:29:25 If, if they, if, if it’s anything other than that, um, it’s not
1:29:29 productive for us and it’s,
1:29:31 it’s, it’s, it’s showy.
1:29:32 Right.
1:29:33 And we’ve had that conversation before.
1:29:34 We, you know, you don’t have a, a constitutional right to our
1:29:38 cameras and microphones.
1:29:39 Right.
1:29:40 You know, you have a, you have constant, you have a right to our
1:29:43 ear.
1:29:43 Um, so I understand that.
1:29:44 I just, I, when we did that before, that, that was what
1:29:47 everybody.
1:29:48 So the difference factor would be the recording.
1:29:52 Um, you know, so I hear you.
1:29:55 Can I, um, I, I’m assuming this, but I just want to ask a legal
1:30:00 clarification and then make
1:30:02 a statement in case anyone’s listening.
1:30:03 So, Mr. Goods, would there be an issue if we are recording it
1:30:09 and posting it in its entirety
1:30:12 and true form in terms, is it just for live broadcasting where
1:30:18 we fall into that issue?
1:30:19 What do you mean?
1:30:20 YouTube is full of all kinds of stuff.
1:30:21 So I don’t think we’re breaking the rules there.
1:30:22 Yeah.
1:30:23 The FCC would only apply to our live broadcasts.
1:30:24 Okay.
1:30:25 At that point, you’re on the internet and searching it out
1:30:26 yourself.
1:30:26 So you would be fine.
1:30:27 Okay.
1:30:28 So I guess I’m just going to make a statement, and I think it’s
1:30:36 a fair assumption here, but
1:30:40 that the three people who made that comment about recording it,
1:30:43 the intention is for it
1:30:44 to be recorded and posted exactly how it is.
1:30:47 No editing.
1:30:48 No.
1:30:49 Yeah.
1:30:51 And I mean, I’m assuming that I just, you know, when people are
1:30:53 going to listen to this,
1:30:53 they’re going to be really sensitive and concerned about that.
1:30:55 So I wanted to say it publicly for all of us.
1:31:00 In a clarification of mine, when we talk about recording, say,
1:31:04 recording non-agenda comments,
1:31:07 are we talking video and audio or just audio?
1:31:10 Right?
1:31:11 Yeah.
1:31:12 Just like we do other things.
1:31:13 I hate to jump in here.
1:31:16 I mean, just other, some of the other boards in the state don’t
1:31:19 have to deal with this because
1:31:21 they either don’t record and broadcast their meetings at all,
1:31:25 and there are a few counties
1:31:26 who don’t, they don’t, if you want to watch the meeting, you got
1:31:28 to be there in person,
1:31:29 or they don’t live stream it, they record it, and they upload it
1:31:32 later.
1:31:33 So these rules don’t apply to them.
1:31:35 That doesn’t handle my personal code of I don’t want it going
1:31:39 out on my watch, but it
1:31:41 does, they don’t have to deal with the FCC rules like the
1:31:44 counties, like ours, that live
1:31:46 stream.
1:31:47 So it’s, some counties just don’t have to deal with that.
1:31:49 They have just allowed whatever to happen and they’re, and they’re
1:31:52 dealing with it.
1:31:52 Because it’s been happening in other places besides just Indian
1:31:56 River.
1:31:57 Okay.
1:31:58 So real quick, if I can kind of make some sense out of it.
1:32:02 I know, I know, I know, I know, but just, just so I can get this.
1:32:05 The conversation has been wrapped around live streaming or
1:32:08 recording, right?
1:32:09 The agenda items.
1:32:10 And then the other topic that’s sort of starting to come up is
1:32:13 whether we move to agenda and
1:32:15 non-agenda items.
1:32:16 And we’ve kind of given some conversation around that.
1:32:21 If I could just ask real quick, Ms. Campbell is in favor of
1:32:27 recording them.
1:32:28 Are you also in favor of splitting the agenda to the non-agenda?
1:32:32 If that’s where we can get, I mean, that’s why I have this
1:32:34 conversation.
1:32:35 Let’s just, everybody kind of talk and come up what we can come
1:32:37 to consensus to because
1:32:39 I, I could be in favor of that.
1:32:41 You know, at some point it’s going to be on the agenda.
1:32:44 So that’s, that’s, and I, to your point, Ms. Trent, that’s going
1:32:47 to be, it’s whenever
1:32:48 the committee makes recommendation, right?
1:32:50 And then we’ll have to come up and, and then it will just depend.
1:32:53 So I could be, I could be agreeable to that.
1:32:58 So what you’re saying, if I can get this straight, is you’re
1:33:02 okay with splitting the agenda, non-agenda,
1:33:05 and then what you’re saying is, is that we would not record the
1:33:08 non-agenda?
1:33:09 Or could you give some clarification to that?
1:33:11 So we, say we split it, which is what she says she’s in favor of.
1:33:14 Are you saying to record both agenda and non-agenda and release
1:33:17 them?
1:33:17 Or are you saying to only record the non-agenda?
1:33:19 I just…
1:33:20 No, no.
1:33:21 If that can…
1:33:22 Are you, you ask what I really want?
1:33:24 I don’t believe that would be, I don’t think we can get, I don’t
1:33:29 think we can get away with that.
1:33:30 I think, I think we should record both.
1:33:32 And I believe that’s what Ms. Jenkins and Ms. Campbell both are
1:33:37 saying.
1:33:37 Broadcast.
1:33:38 Record both or broadcast?
1:33:39 We’re not going to live, no, not live streaming it.
1:33:41 Which one?
1:33:42 The non-agenda.
1:33:43 Okay, right, right, right.
1:33:44 That’s what I thought.
1:33:45 You need to do the agenda.
1:33:46 I mean…
1:33:47 So we would live stream the agenda, not live stream, and record
1:33:49 the non-agenda.
1:33:50 Correct.
1:33:51 That’s what it is.
1:33:52 Okay.
1:33:53 Is that…
1:33:54 I…
1:33:55 From what I’m hearing, that’s exactly what…
1:33:56 Is that what you’re saying?
1:33:57 The two have spoken so far.
1:33:58 Yeah.
1:33:59 Have also said.
1:34:00 Yeah, I would…
1:34:01 The separation I was originally suggesting was just moving the
1:34:03 book challenges to the end.
1:34:04 Right.
1:34:05 Whether agenda or non-agenda.
1:34:06 But if that’s not going to fly, that’s fine.
1:34:09 Okay.
1:34:10 Mr. Gibbs, are we…
1:34:15 Is that something we can do if we separate them from agenda to
1:34:17 non-agenda?
1:34:18 Yeah.
1:34:19 Non-agenda, you know, you can eliminate non-agenda comments
1:34:22 altogether.
1:34:23 So if the board says we’re only going to hear comments to the
1:34:27 agenda items at night, then
1:34:29 the board is well within its rights to do so.
1:34:32 Okay.
1:34:34 All right.
1:34:35 So it looks like it has legal standing.
1:34:36 Looks like you have…
1:34:37 Ms. Jenkins, is that something that you would support doing?
1:34:40 Separating the agenda to non-agenda and going that route?
1:34:44 Mr. Susan, I already said my piece.
1:34:47 Okay.
1:34:48 All right.
1:34:49 I think he’s trying to get it straight in his own mind.
1:34:50 Just trying to get it straight here so that we can then move
1:34:52 forward.
1:34:53 And after we…
1:34:54 I’m sure after we hear from the…
1:34:55 Go ahead, Ms. Megan.
1:34:56 It’s clear as mud.
1:34:57 Yeah.
1:34:59 This is one of those things where, listen, public comment is
1:35:02 everyone loves free speech,
1:35:03 but when it comes down to the time to actually defend it, which
1:35:06 is kind of where we’re at
1:35:08 right now, like how much do you love it?
1:35:09 I get it.
1:35:10 It’s not comfortable.
1:35:11 I guess the FCC regulation is really what is messing with us on
1:35:16 televising live, if I’m
1:35:19 understanding this correctly, the stuff that’s getting read from
1:35:23 this.
1:35:24 Is that correct, Mr. Gibbs?
1:35:26 That is really what this is all about.
1:35:27 The FCC rules play into it.
1:35:30 Now, I’ll say, I’ve never heard of a district get hit for an FCC
1:35:36 violation for allowing people
1:35:39 to read books on their broadcasts.
1:35:41 And there are some counties that have allowed it for a while,
1:35:45 even before the book challenge
1:35:46 statue came down.
1:35:48 They had people come and read books and argue the book shouldn’t
1:35:52 be there, and they’ve never
1:35:53 been hit.
1:35:54 They’ve never had to be there.
1:36:07 And our public is going to come alive and unglued if we don’t
1:36:11 allow non-agenda items at all,
1:36:14 which is our right to do.
1:36:16 But just to be clear, this isn’t a free speech.
1:36:20 You don’t have a right to say everything you want to say at
1:36:23 every location that you want
1:36:24 to say it.
1:36:25 That’s not the First Amendment.
1:36:27 - So I’m where I was before and as uncomfortable as that
1:36:32 situation is.
1:36:34 So I guess at this point it sounds like the board majority is
1:36:36 moving a different direction
1:36:37 anyways.
1:36:38 But I can see the benefit of having agenda versus non-agenda.
1:36:42 It probably would help this board as far as governance goes,
1:36:45 just because it is a little
1:36:46 rough to have to hear 30, 40 people come out and hurl insults
1:36:50 for three minutes and then
1:36:51 be in your best, you know, frame of mind to govern afterwards.
1:36:54 So if there were any compromise I was going to make on this one,
1:36:57 it would be, I would be
1:36:59 in favor of supporting the agenda versus the non-agenda split.
1:37:06 As far as televising it live versus playing it back.
1:37:09 Here’s the other reality is that if somebody sits here and reads
1:37:13 it and we’re not streaming
1:37:14 it live and there’s kids in the room, the kids in the room are
1:37:17 still hearing it.
1:37:18 So it doesn’t protect them if we’re not streaming it live.
1:37:21 You know what I’m saying?
1:37:22 That’s where I just like this is, there’s no perfect answer in
1:37:24 this situation.
1:37:25 Unfortunately, there really isn’t.
1:37:26 And so what I hope would happen is that the community would
1:37:29 recognize the fact that we
1:37:31 have revised the policy that we have put into place some
1:37:34 protections at this point.
1:37:36 So the need to come here and read a book doesn’t really, it’s
1:37:39 not necessary because the book
1:37:40 isn’t accessible if it’s gone through the formal challenge
1:37:43 process anyways.
1:37:43 So all you’re really doing is looking for a three minute clip.
1:37:46 And then the other thing I’ll say about agenda versus non-agenda,
1:37:48 which is very maddening
1:37:49 to me, is that we have people come and they speak every single
1:37:53 week or every other week,
1:37:54 whatever it is at our board meetings.
1:37:55 And never once try to reach out to any, well to me anyways, I
1:37:57 don’t know about you guys,
1:37:58 to sit down and talk to us about these things, to actually have
1:38:01 a conversation.
1:38:02 So public comment is frustrating.
1:38:04 It is extremely frustrating because we understand that people
1:38:07 are doing it because they want
1:38:08 to have three minutes of a clip in essence.
1:38:11 And so, you know, again, where I’m at, where I fall is if I were
1:38:15 going to do any compromise,
1:38:16 it would be I would split the agenda versus the non-agenda.
1:38:19 That way people are speaking towards the things that we’re
1:38:22 actually governing on that evening.
1:38:24 And then at the end of it, we can take the, you know, attacks
1:38:27 that are going to get hurled over
1:38:29 things that are not on the agenda.
1:38:31 All right, so Paul, it would be a policy change to move it to
1:38:35 separate, correct?
1:38:37 Yes, we’d have to change the policy.
1:38:39 And in the meantime, you would have to make motions to split the
1:38:44 agenda again, like you’ve done in the past.
1:38:46 But just some considerations that came up last time we had the
1:38:52 split is,
1:38:52 how are you going to handle someone who wants agenda and non-agenda
1:38:56 topics?
1:38:57 Are you going to take all of their comments in one three minute
1:39:01 block during agenda?
1:39:03 In which case you’re creating a loophole, so somebody will talk
1:39:08 to an agenda item for 30 seconds
1:39:09 and then spend the rest of their two and a half minutes reading
1:39:13 a book.
1:39:14 Or are you going to say you get two three minute periods, you
1:39:18 can have your three minutes on an agenda topic,
1:39:21 and then three minutes at the end on non-agenda topics like we
1:39:25 did last time.
1:39:26 I think we can get to that in a second and we can also get to
1:39:29 that.
1:39:29 I just I wanted to say that I do hear a board majority.
1:39:32 I’ll speak to all these topics.
1:39:33 But before I get going, I just want to make sure I hear a board
1:39:36 majority of splitting the agenda topics.
1:39:38 I wasn’t completely sure on whether we are recording these or if
1:39:43 we’re going to let agenda and non-agenda run.
1:39:45 Can I get clarification on that?
1:39:48 Megan, did you want to allow it to be recorded or do you want it
1:39:53 to allow it to be live?
1:39:56 I guess I, to me, I was in favor of live always.
1:40:00 But that’s, yeah, I know it’s not the majority.
1:40:03 It sounds like everyone’s kind of recording versus.
1:40:06 Okay.
1:40:07 And I’m sorry to go back in reverse order.
1:40:10 Yeah, no, it’s okay.
1:40:11 Mr. Trent, you are to record the both agenda and non-agenda and
1:40:18 split them too.
1:40:19 Is that kind of the direction that you would like to go?
1:40:22 I would prefer live streaming the agenda comment and record the
1:40:28 non-agenda.
1:40:30 Okay.
1:40:31 And then Ms. Campbell, can you give clarification?
1:40:33 Right.
1:40:34 If we’re going to split agenda and non-agenda, I would, like Mr.
1:40:37 Trent, I’d rather live stream the agenda comments and record the
1:40:41 non-agenda to be posted soon after.
1:40:44 Okay.
1:40:45 And Ms. Jenkins, do you want to give some clarification?
1:40:49 Yeah.
1:40:50 So I just, I want to reiterate, there is a board majority, but I
1:40:53 do want to reiterate, like my number one choice is to allow the
1:40:57 public to speak and not abuse it first.
1:41:00 But because there’s already a board majority, and my second
1:41:03 choice was if there was a problem, we’d get to this point anyway,
1:41:06 my preference would be to just record it.
1:41:10 There’s no point, there’s no point of live streaming it.
1:41:12 But I do, I just want to throw this out there to you guys, but
1:41:16 also to the public.
1:41:17 There’s still nothing stopping the public from abusing this by
1:41:22 walking up to an agenda for an agenda item and not speaking on
1:41:26 the agenda.
1:41:27 And then I cut them off.
1:41:28 And then being stopped.
1:41:29 Correct.
1:41:30 And then I cut them off.
1:41:31 And so I really hope that people don’t do that.
1:41:35 And again, I’m going to say it again, if we get to that point, I
1:41:38 hope that this board is willing to have a conversation about
1:41:41 what to do from that point forward, because that’s just
1:41:44 inappropriate.
1:41:45 Yeah.
1:41:46 I would say there is, it’s not, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen
1:41:49 it be used.
1:41:50 In fact, there were several times over the last couple years it
1:41:53 should have been used.
1:41:54 But there, among the things that the board chair can stop a
1:42:00 speaker for includes, when it’s too lengthy, obviously that’s
1:42:06 when the timer goes off, personally directed, except as allowed
1:42:09 above with us, right?
1:42:10 Abusive, obscene, or irrelevant.
1:42:15 So, if someone comes up to speak to an agenda item, and they
1:42:19 start going off another topic, the chair can stop them from
1:42:22 speaking for a speech that’s irrelevant.
1:42:24 You know, there’s a couple times in the past–
1:42:26 But this is written so broadly that they could apply this,
1:42:28 probably.
1:42:29 Well, I’m going to say that would just, I’m going to say it
1:42:32 wouldn’t, because it would stop him not for the language in the
1:42:36 book, but because this is not the agenda item, so no, you know,
1:42:39 it’s something that is already built into our policy.
1:42:44 So if someone, and it’s built in, therefore someone comes up and
1:42:46 starts talking about immigration policy, the chair should be
1:42:49 able to stop them and say thank you so much, I appreciate your
1:42:51 concern, but that doesn’t, that’s not relevant here.
1:42:53 We have no control over that.
1:42:55 And we’ve had, I only use that example because we had somebody
1:42:58 talk about that one time.
1:42:59 That is absolutely an abuse of, I want your microphone and your
1:43:03 camera to, you know, to do whatever thing.
1:43:04 But I, you know, Ms. Wright and Ms. Jenkins, you both mentioned
1:43:08 we hope no one would, but I want you to remember that a few
1:43:13 meetings ago we had three ladies stand up and read from books
1:43:16 who are already in the process.
1:43:18 And so, yes, I would want them to know, hey, the process is
1:43:21 going.
1:43:21 We, these are all very off the shelf, but yet they were already
1:43:24 doing it.
1:43:25 So we, we’ve already had it happen actually here.
1:43:27 We just didn’t have in place this statute and this conversation.
1:43:31 So, you know, I, yeah, and I, and I’m only saying that just
1:43:37 because this is complicated and we’ve come to, I’d say a
1:43:42 compromise and agreement amongst everyone.
1:43:45 And again, my first choice was to let it go and then to get here,
1:43:48 but we’re here.
1:43:49 So let’s talk about it.
1:43:50 But I, I just want people to, to be aware of that.
1:43:53 So when it happens, it’s not like, it doesn’t seem like it’s
1:43:56 reactionary for me to say, hey, we need to have this
1:43:58 conversation because this has always been my true intention.
1:44:00 And then regardless of who’s coming up to that microphone and
1:44:03 taking advantage of it, it’s just wrong, it’s inappropriate.
1:44:05 So I just hope we can be open-minded if we, if we have to get
1:44:08 there.
1:44:09 I hope we don’t have to get there.
1:44:11 So I think we have clear majority for separating them two and
1:44:16 not recording, or I’m sorry, going to a recording of the non-agended
1:44:20 items.
1:44:20 I think I’m hearing that pretty clear.
1:44:22 I did want to tell everybody my, my viewpoints.
1:44:25 Florida statute 610 requires a disclaimer for any of this FCC
1:44:29 stuff.
1:44:30 And it allows a governmental entity with a disclaimer to
1:44:34 continue to not worry about violating FCC rules.
1:44:38 Part of the reason that we haven’t seen anything come out is, is
1:44:41 because there’s that gray area.
1:44:43 But there, I think moving forward, we should have a disclaimer
1:44:46 in the event that that protects us from any kind of those
1:44:50 governmental.
1:44:51 So I would say that.
1:44:52 You mean regardless of what happens?
1:44:54 Yeah, I just, I’ve just got to have a disclaimer and it’s
1:44:57 actually inside of some of the scripts, but it’s not written as
1:45:01 a disclaimer.
1:45:02 It’s kind of just like, hey, you got to act correctly.
1:45:04 But as a disclaimer to give us some sort of padding there, I
1:45:07 would say that I’m concerned about us coming forward with this
1:45:12 based upon a single issue.
1:45:13 Going back as long as I have, we’ve seen so many regarding
1:45:18 issues coming up to change policy based on that.
1:45:22 And I feel very confident that the decision that you guys made
1:45:25 was to move separate all non agenda items, which is not saying,
1:45:29 okay, because I was beginning to have a problem with you guys
1:45:32 separating based upon only book challenges, right?
1:45:35 That would have been kind of the inappropriate way to do it, I
1:45:38 feel.
1:45:39 But I do feel this.
1:45:40 I do feel that I pushed forward a policy that said that I agreed
1:45:44 to let everybody come up, have their three minutes during the
1:45:48 agenda piece and to let it run.
1:45:50 So that’s where my feelings are, is that I don’t mind it being
1:45:53 live.
1:45:54 I don’t mind it being, I would vote to have it live and I would
1:45:57 vote to have it where they could speak at during the agenda
1:45:59 items for public speaking.
1:46:01 But I do appreciate you guys’ concern and I do appreciate you
1:46:05 guys separating it.
1:46:06 What I would say is if your concerns are over some of the stuff
1:46:10 happening, that Paul, we move this policy forward.
1:46:13 It should be a very brief, quick one.
1:46:16 So I don’t know if you can notice it and bring it forward for
1:46:18 conversation.
1:46:19 Are you guys okay with a fast track on this thing happening?
1:46:23 Okay.
1:46:24 I’ll get it on the next available.
1:46:26 It might not, it’s probably not going to be the 19th, so you’re
1:46:28 probably looking at October just because.
1:46:30 Do you feel like you have, and I’ll give everybody a chance to
1:46:32 talk.
1:46:32 I know everybody wants to kind of say something afterwards.
1:46:34 But Paul, do you feel like you have a clear direction on what
1:46:37 you need to put in that policy?
1:46:39 The only thing that’s missing is are you doing the two, three
1:46:41 minute pieces that I had brought up earlier?
1:46:43 My, my, my direction would say to give them the two minutes, the
1:46:46 two, three minute periods.
1:46:47 I’m not going to split and try to take 245 of one and 15 of
1:46:50 another.
1:46:51 And if that’s okay with you guys, it would be easier to flow.
1:46:55 And that’ll make it more difficult for the chair to stop someone
1:46:58 for being irrelevant.
1:46:59 If we’re telling them this is the only time you get to speak.
1:47:01 It does give the opportunity for people to speak multiple times,
1:47:04 which honestly some people have asked for.
1:47:05 Yeah.
1:47:06 But if they’re willing to stick around to the end of the talk, a
1:47:08 different issue.
1:47:08 But I think we do need to have the chair is going to need to end.
1:47:10 When I say the chair, don’t think just about you.
1:47:13 Posterity’s sake.
1:47:14 You know, whoever is in that role needs to be able to stop
1:47:17 someone for being irrelevant.
1:47:18 And if we make them do it all at once, they’re not going to be
1:47:20 able to do that.
1:47:21 I will, I will say this, you guys.
1:47:23 The main thing, and I wanted to make this clear as far as what I
1:47:26 believe in allowing them to come is this.
1:47:29 Is that we have sometimes a long meeting.
1:47:31 And we have employees that come to speak to us on specific
1:47:34 topics.
1:47:35 And when they have to come up here and they have to wait until
1:47:37 the end of the meeting, it’s kind of hard.
1:47:39 You know what I mean?
1:47:40 But to that regard, they also have the availability to send us
1:47:43 an email and to communicate with us, which is what Miss Megan
1:47:45 was asking for.
1:47:46 So I completely understand that argument too.
1:47:48 So I think we have some clear direction.
1:47:50 Paul, if you can figure out a way to get it as fast as possible,
1:47:52 because I hear that from the board.
1:47:54 Can I ask one technical question, Paul, real fast?
1:47:57 Because I don’t know if this needs to be written into the policy
1:47:59 or not.
1:47:59 But the chair has the ability to stop public comment when it’s,
1:48:05 if we change the policy, as we’re saying we’re changing the
1:48:07 policy.
1:48:07 When a public comment comes forward and they’re speaking to a
1:48:10 non-agenda item, under the agenda item, the chair has the
1:48:13 ability to stop them.
1:48:14 Is there a way to write into policy that after like, hey, three
1:48:17 strikes, you’re out.
1:48:18 So like they will lose their right to continue public comment if
1:48:20 they don’t?
1:48:21 No, I wouldn’t.
1:48:22 I wouldn’t go there.
1:48:23 I would just like if someone gets up there as mentioned and
1:48:27 wants to read a book during the agenda portion and it’s not on
1:48:31 the agenda, you’re not stopping them.
1:48:33 I think that the chair’s response should be, excuse me, you’re
1:48:37 speaking to a non-agenda topic during the agenda.
1:48:41 Do you have an agenda topic you would like to discuss tonight?
1:48:44 If not, I will move you to the non-agenda portion and you can
1:48:49 come back up and you can read your book at that time during the
1:48:52 scheduled appropriate time for your comment.
1:48:54 It’s not, we’re not stopping you.
1:48:56 It’s like this is the agenda portion of the meeting so that the
1:48:58 board can get on with its business.
1:49:00 You’re free to come back at the non-agenda portion.
1:49:03 Okay.
1:49:04 So I mean, I think that would be the appropriate way to go.
1:49:06 Just move them to the end.
1:49:07 Yeah, they would just go and we would just, he would just put a
1:49:10 note out on beside their name, non-agenda, and they would go to
1:49:14 the end of the non-agenda list.
1:49:15 So also, Paul, just so everybody understands, we don’t have to
1:49:19 pass the policy in order to do this.
1:49:21 If you remember when we moved to have this changed from the last
1:49:25 time, I can enact it at the next policy at the next meeting.
1:49:30 If you guys would like me to move forward with that, I can have
1:49:33 Ms. Lena put that together and we can move immediately forward
1:49:35 with it.
1:49:36 Well, one of us will need to bring a motion.
1:49:39 Yes, I’m happy to do it that way.
1:49:40 Yeah, at the beginning I mention it, then you guys bring a
1:49:43 motion, then we vote on it, then we move forward and we can go
1:49:45 that route.
1:49:46 Yeah, and because they’re going to have to draft like a new
1:49:49 script, I mean, can just, can you put that line in there?
1:49:53 Yeah, we can make a, the way we did it before was we put a
1:49:56 little spot, is there a motion to split agenda?
1:50:00 Oh, no, I’m sorry.
1:50:01 Yeah, I’m sorry.
1:50:02 Mr. Susan asked for that already.
1:50:03 I just meant like, just another reference point for Mr. Susan or
1:50:06 whoever becomes the chair in November.
1:50:08 If someone gets up there and reads.
1:50:10 Yeah, just like, you know, when you panic in the moment, you
1:50:12 know, just so it’s right then and there, so you say the right
1:50:15 thing.
1:50:15 Yeah.
1:50:16 So we don’t accidentally stop them when that wasn’t the
1:50:18 intention.
1:50:18 Right.
1:50:19 Yeah.
1:50:20 And then, Mr. Brown, you got things from that end as far as
1:50:28 recording and, oh, do you have something you want to say?
1:50:34 Yeah, are you able to answer about the timeline?
1:50:37 Yeah.
1:50:38 Before I, before I make a statement and a promise, that’s not
1:50:40 possible.
1:50:40 Yeah, I think it is important to set expectations for the board
1:50:45 and the public.
1:50:47 Technically, it is not the same to record the public comment as
1:50:52 we do with the board meeting.
1:50:55 The board meeting obviously is on a broadcast channel and that
1:50:59 is live and then it’s played back along with other meetings.
1:51:02 So that will be fine.
1:51:04 Our YouTube channel where we also broadcast is a live broadcast.
1:51:08 And so that, once that’s done, that automatically generates the
1:51:12 recorded clip.
1:51:13 In order to record public comment off camera and during a
1:51:18 meeting time, we would use a separate camera and audio.
1:51:23 And we would then after the meeting, take that file and put an
1:51:28 in and out point on it and obviously no editing and upload it to
1:51:32 YouTube with proper language about what the content is.
1:51:36 And that takes a little bit of time.
1:51:38 So if Dr. Rendell would, you know, direct me to have my staff do
1:51:42 that after the meeting on Tuesdays or Thursday nights, we would
1:51:46 do that, but it would not be instant.
1:51:47 It would be 30 minutes or so.
1:51:50 So is it reasonable, though, to say within 24 hours?
1:51:54 Yes, very much, yeah.
1:51:56 It could be the next morning.
1:51:57 It would be better for everybody’s mindset, but it could be that
1:52:00 night if it’s necessary.
1:52:02 I want Mike to have to stay an extra hour or two to get it done.
1:52:05 The next day is fine.
1:52:07 The other thing is, is that we never used to record it before.
1:52:09 So at the end, if somebody wanted to come and give the testimony,
1:52:12 you didn’t have to record it.
1:52:14 Like you, we just, that was it.
1:52:16 Like you come speak to us, we wouldn’t have to have Mike making
1:52:18 the recording and all of that stuff.
1:52:20 You don’t have to record non-agended items.
1:52:22 That’s all.
1:52:23 We have always since I’ve been on the board.
1:52:24 I just, the reason, the reason I’m trying to be specific about
1:52:28 it, and we don’t have to put an hour on it, but the reason why I’m
1:52:31 trying to make the conversation specific is, you know, we are at
1:52:35 a very fragile time and sensitive time where people are always
1:52:38 concerned.
1:52:39 Like when the, when we lose live stream, they think it’s on
1:52:42 purpose.
1:52:42 Right.
1:52:43 And so if we can err on, if we can err on the side of being as
1:52:47 transparent as physically possible, or at least when discussing
1:52:50 it, like our intention is to get it out within 24 hours.
1:52:53 I just, I think that’s important.
1:52:55 I don’t, I don’t think that it needs to literally be a black and
1:52:58 white thing, but just so that as the public listening to this
1:53:01 conversation, they know the intention is for it to be as soon as
1:53:04 possible.
1:53:05 Right.
1:53:07 And it wouldn’t want to write it in policy.
1:53:08 It shall be, you know.
1:53:10 Yeah.
1:53:11 It would be pretty quick turnaround, but it does take time.
1:53:14 It’s not as instantaneous as it is on our website, which is an
1:53:17 automated program as well, or it’s live.
1:53:20 So just technical issues there.
1:53:22 Will you need like a one minute, you know.
1:53:25 Probably be good to do a break.
1:53:26 Potentially, yeah.
1:53:27 So we can switch to cameras.
1:53:28 Yeah, yeah.
1:53:29 Because it would be a little bit distracting to have the
1:53:31 equipment, you know, up here during a meeting for two hours.
1:53:34 Right.
1:53:35 Or three hours.
1:53:36 And then all of a sudden we use it finally.
1:53:38 So I wouldn’t want to do that to the city.
1:53:39 And one thing just for the, because you guys, we’ve changed the,
1:53:43 right, when you guys got on the board, but just to remind our,
1:53:47 us and new board members, we will not be able to conduct any
1:53:51 business after that.
1:53:51 Like the meeting will pretty much be officially done when we
1:53:55 make that switch.
1:53:56 And so we won’t, you know, it’ll just be listened to the last,
1:54:00 however, handful of people, maybe direct them to staff and then.
1:54:04 Mm-hmm.
1:54:05 So you kind of answered my question I was about to ask, or
1:54:08 refreshing my memory.
1:54:10 This happens after board discussion.
1:54:12 Correct?
1:54:13 So it’s like-
1:54:14 Well, that’s your decision.
1:54:15 Okay.
1:54:16 I mean, we’ll accommodate anything we can to the best of our
1:54:19 ability.
1:54:19 Okay.
1:54:20 I was curious.
1:54:21 I don’t remember.
1:54:22 Yeah.
1:54:23 We were done with like everything.
1:54:24 Anybody else have anything else before the, for the good of the
1:54:31 order?
1:54:32 Hearing none, I wanted to mention to you guys that I’ll be
1:54:35 asking law enforcement agencies to review social media to see if
1:54:38 anybody broke it based upon our Viera situation that we had,
1:54:42 where there was some people posting some stuff.
1:54:45 Anything else?
1:54:46 It should be good.
1:54:47 That’s it.
1:54:48 Thank you.