Down down down down. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Welcome to today's special schoolboard meeting. The special schoolboard meeting of the school board of Brower County, Florida is now called to order. To ensure a safe and productive
environment, please note the clearly marked emergency exits. Do not block exit doors and all attendees must be seated except for media. Once the room reaches capacity, attendees will be directed to the overflow area. If the fire alarm sounds, exit the room calmly, continue outside the building, and remain there until authorities give
clearance to return. Thank you for your cooperation. All please rise for the pledge of allegiance to the United States of America. >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for its one nation, indivisible with all. As we begin, we reaffirm our vision. 100% proficiency for all students. As an A-rated district, we remain committed to sustaining this achievement and
supporting every student to reach their highest potential. Our theme this year is believe, empower, achieve one Broward. Today's special schoolboard meeting will operate in accordance with schoolboard policy 1020, and the board will review the items as advertised and presented by the superintendent. In the
absence of a vice chair today, I would like to name uh Miss Deborah Hixon as the vice chair. Do you accept? >> Yes. Thank you. Before we get to today's agenda, the superintendent has requested an opportunity to address the board.
Good morning, Madam Chair, and thank you, members of the board, members of the public. In keeping with our responsibility to the citizens of Broward County, I want to emphasize that all staff members and most importantly I myself are fully accountable to the
citizens of Broward County and also this board. This commitment means that every action taken within our organization is guided by a sense of duty and transparency. We recognize that the trust placed in us by the community requires consistent oversight and willingness to acknowledge and address
challenges as they arise. Our staff at every level understands the importance of maintaining public confidence through responsible decision-making and open communication. As a leader of this organization, I hold myself to the highest standards of accountability. I'm dedicated to ensuring our practices
align with the expectations of Broward County residents and that we uphold our commitment to serving in their best interests. This approach fosters a culture where accountability is not only expected but embraced, reinforcing our shared goal of continuous improvement
and responsible stewardship. In response to the concerns raised by the chief auditor's report regarding RFQ26-059, I've directed human resources to initiate a formal investigation. Applicable staff members, mainly executive leaders, have been reassigned
during the investigation. HR will conduct interviews, examine relevant documents, and pass decision-making to ensure maximum accountability. I've asked HR to proceed with this investigation as swiftly as possible without compromising compromising the integrity of the process. This is a high
priority. I also want to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to the board for your ongoing guidance. Um, in many of our 10 one 10 oneonone meetings, I often acknowledge that feedback is a gift. I acknowledge our challenges and also our mistakes. While we are making efforts to improve our
processes, operational errors have happened. My commitment to you and our community is to ensure accountability among staff when necessary, including myself, and to continually enhance our systems to guarantee transparency, compliance, and ongoing progress. Over
the past year, under this board's leadership, BCPS has maintained its A-rating, achieved high performing district status, and for the second consecutive year, eliminated all DNF schools. At the same time, we remain candid about challenges such as enrollment shifts, funding changes, and
financial realities that require us to permanently adjust how we operate. As outlined in yesterday's memo, we are moving from continuous change toward establishing long-term operational discipline guided by five main priorities. Student success. We are to
uh safeguard our A rating, increase proficiency, and expand access to magnet programs, career pathways, and advanced learning opportunities, ensuring sustained academic improvement. Redefining BCPS phase two. We are finalizing consolidations, closures, and
program realignments to set clear utilization standards, eliminate inefficiencies, and ensure every remaining school is positioned to offer highquality instruction. Organization realignment. We will complete the new 2627 school year organizational chart, making permanent staffing alignments
based on enrollment and service needs while prioritizing classrooms and student support service. Budget realignment. We are implementing ongoing fiscal discipline, stabilizing our fund balance and focusing spending on classroom safety and essential student supports and also procurement integrity.
We are strengthening procurement and contracting services to secure transparency, accountability, and strict adherence to board policies and legal requirements. Before closing, I also want to share uh uh about compensation recommendations for myself. On going
forward, I recommend that the referendum supplements for ESMAB employees be restricted to pay ban D and below. This reflects my personal beliefs that voter approved funds should prioritize school-based and frontline staff who have the most direct impact on students
and daily operations. Directing these resources to those roles enhances our ability to attract and retain personnel directly supporting teacher teaching, learning, student safety, and essential services. while ensuring that referendum funds remain focused on the district's
core mission. Of course, the board retains the authority to amend the structure of the referendum as it sees fit. In closing, together as one Broward, we're setting a new standard for public education, one built on transparency, accountability, and bold action. This is our district. This is
our moment, and we will move forward with unity, strength, and absolute commitment to the children and families that we serve every day here in Broward County and Broward County Public Schools. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Chair, I had a follow-up question. Uh, could the superintendent discuss what
titles the investigation is starting with? >> Yes. Um, thank you, Miss Thompson. For right now, the um HR is investigating um executive leaders, mainly our COO and executive director um in procurement and a couple other roles in procurement as well.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. The superintendent released a revised agenda with certain changes for this meeting and published it on the school district's website. The chair finds pursuant to section 120.525 Florida statutes that good cause exists for such changes and accepts the revised
agenda. May I have a motion and a second to close the agenda. >> Second. >> Moved by Dr. Zean, seconded by Miss Thompson. All in favor of closing the agenda, let it be known by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposer say no. The agenda is now closed. May I have a motion and a second
on item one? Correct referendum supplements for 12-month administrative employees. >> So moved. >> Moved by Dr. Zean, seconded by Miss Hixon. >> It is moved and seconded to move item one to the floor. Are there any public comment? >> Yes, madam chair. There are four pub
register speakers for item one. First is Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, followed by Pete Tingum. Good morning, Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. I've been sending you happy new year and happy three kings day. This is today's
the feast of the Epiphany. Um you're supposed to have frankincense, gold, and myrr. And myrrh, as it turns out, is an inbombing spice um used for the dead. So, I'll let my words act as myrr today.
So, I sent you guys an email and unlike your superintendent and staff, I bring my receipts and I put together schedules. So, just to review, general powers of the district school superintendent advise counsel and
recommend to the school board. Advise and counsel. This is from Florida statute 101.49 49 from 101.51. Duties and responsibilities of the district school superintendent. The district school superintendent shall perform all tasks necessary to make
sound recommendations and so on and so forth. You also have schoolboard policy 7550, standards of ethical conduct, schoolboard policy 4413, the anti-fraud policy, Florida statute 837.06, 06 false official
statements and then there's that concept of fraud by omission because of all the things I've seen since 2011 when I started volunteering what the the fraud by omission because it it it checks all the boxes that was
visited upon the school board and remember all recommendations are coming from your superintendent. So in 2023, August 29th, there was language that restricted the referendum to employees
on pay band D and below. By some magic, there's nothing in writing that you guys received that said that changed. And then you approved on May 21, 2024 a 2.26 onetime bonus. You know what happened on the ESAP
schedule? The language magically disappeared. It's like they were testing the waters to see if anyone would say, "Hey, what's missing from this schedule?" So, I tried to make it clear. We got a check mark in column one that shows the language in
and then we have question marks where the language disappears. So then by July 30th, having tested whether you guys would notice that something you haven't seen since August of 23 was now missing and it's not in the executive summary
anywhere. Then you approved the ESMAP schedule, the referendum supplements for the 2425 school year. Um, [clears throat] and staff is claiming that you guys approved and implying
knowingly if it's not disclosed anywhere, this is not a scrivener's error. This is not an honest mistake. This was deliberately omitted so you guys would approve something that you would not approve and the public would be enraged about. Thank you.
>> Next speaker, Peter Tingum. Madame Chair, elected appointed schoolboard members, Superintendent Heppern, my name is Pete Tingum. I am the executive director of ESMAB, of which this item relates to. I'd like to go back and do a little bit
of history of the referendum dollars. The first referendum dollars, no money was allocated to SMAB employees. None. I think the only two groups omitted for uh the school board and SMAB and during those three years
SMAB salaries flatlined across while other districts improved over us. There was a chart given to you back in those days and that happened because of the language and the way it was written. Yet, after negotiations with collective
bargaining agreements, every other employee in the district received a similar sum in in dollars as to the referendum dollars, but that money came from the general fund, and that money was approved, put out there. We had one
employee in ESMAB who transferred into a TSP position and received an over $3,000 raise because for those three years nothing was included uh for ESMAP. When the second referendum came around, the language was changed
and it was eligible for all employees to receive referendum dollars. And at that point in time, ESAP obviously was negotiating at the table. We don't negotiate, we meet and confer. And at that time, it was
approved for ESAP employees to receive referendum dollars. And for the first year, it excluded approximately 40 employees. After that point in time, then it came up again. And when that came up that
time, as Dr. Walsh alluded to it included everyone and that was passed for three additional years and if that motion was passed that money has been paid for the past six months to all those employees to make a change at this
point in time. I would seriously question whether that's legal after you've done that and paid that money out and I think it would be reigging on that promise which was given at that point in time. I'd also like to point out that many of these salaries that are here are
not subject to ESAP. They are negotiated salaries that happen between the chief auditor, legal counsel, and other people. And I respectfully request that you look at this because I don't think it's legal for you to change this at this point in time. And I also think
that it'll be much better for you to look at big ticket items such as legal, consultant, and insurance. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Terry Price, followed by President Anna Fusco.
>> She was told she couldn't sign up. That's incorrect. Just stating for the record. My name is Terry Pson. I was wanting to donate my time to Anna Fusco. >> We no longer donate time. >> Okay. Um
>> that's not a great idea. >> Policy change. So if you would like to speak, >> I'm speaking now. Okay. >> Um that's not a great idea in all the history of all the time that I've come here. So I'd like you to rethink that because we've always been able to give time to the people who are the most
concise and knowledgeable speakers um on a certain topic. Um, I've given my time sometimes to >> please speak to the item. Thank you. >> I don't even know. This is the topic. The topic is the changes that happen because you guys are now wanting to
change how the money is distributed and this well um Nora is the only one here from back in the day when we first decided about the referendum and how that referendum was going to be split and why we needed it. We needed it because the school board that was in
place was not able to give teachers a raise. They didn't know how to give teachers a raise. Same thing happened when I got caught from my um my um steps. So, this idea was came up with
with the with the board and with the community for the teachers. Who knocked on the doors to get that money? I did. She did. Anna did. Hundreds of teachers knocked on the doors of our community because guess what? We know something.
They love their teachers. So, we had this referendum passed and it was such a good idea actually that Miami and Palm Beach decided to do the same thing and they asked for more money. And guess what? They kept it within only the teachers, which is what the community actually wanted.
We allowed it to be shared for a certain portion. But this whole business of well let's share it with other people, people in management, that's a new thing that somebody came up with and it wasn't you guys.
But some people who are sitting here who maybe are telling you that that's how things were done. That's not how things were done. When did it change? Why did it change? It's not what the community voted for. It's not what I knocked on doors for. When I looked in people's
eyes, I told them it's for teachers. It's for people who are actually in the classrooms. So, I do not appreciate when the board or the county does not know how to manage their money and start using their money for other things and say, "Well, we can just bank on the
referendum." No, sir. No, ma'am. The referendum money was for the teachers. You don't get to just use it when other people want to raise or other people see, oh, there's this pot of money. We got that pot of money for the county.
And the community agreed for a reason. And the reason was for the teachers. So, as soon as you start changing what you're going to do with it, you're doing something that's not right. So, who's telling you to do this? It's it's not the people who knocked on the doors.
I'll tell you that for nothing. Our final speaker is President Anna Fusco. I'll end it. I'll put the exclamation point. >> Uh my name is Dr. Trudy Germanovich. Um again, I'm appalled that district staff
has directed funds to the highest wage earners in this district. When the voters approved the bond, monies, teachers were to be the main beneficiaries of these funds so that they could have some hope of making ends meet with their insufficient base
salary. School-based personnel and a few others were also to be included. I said schoolbased teachers received monies through the regular bargaining process and if there were funds left over the money was to be
again distributed to teachers. In other words, you took money away from teachers by doing this through the bargaining agreement. When money is siphoned off and given to those making more than $100,000 a year, it's just not fair. It
is unthinkable that the district staff misinterpreted the will of the board and allowed so many highly paid individuals to reap a windfall that was supposed to go mainly to teachers. I believe that the board
must do all it can to write this wrong and that they this may mean that some staff members need to be changed or terminated. This is not the only time changes were
kept from the board and became the cause of wasted time and resources. I've been a part of the chaotic meetings held to modify policy which were often left until the very last minute like the one
you remove today. The fiasco with clear backpacks was not brought to the board appropriately and caused the board to look like they were not in control of upper level administration. The constant postponement of the
approval of the sex edge curriculum has decimated what what used to be a comprehensive program. Staff stated that it didn't matter how late it was approved because that's when schools implemented it. It's nice that they tell
the schools when they're going to implement it in the middle of testing. You know, I'm passionate about that topic. Middle and high school teachers said that that was incorrect and they wished to implement the program earlier in the
year, but they were thwarted by upper level administrators. Upper level administrators are going into schools and telling them they must do these tests when they don't legally have to do them.
They do not have to do all of these additional tests. and you should give the teachers the right to choose. There are only a few instances where upper lever level administrators were not following the will of the board or
these are only a few. I hope you can rectify this situation. [clears throat] >> So good morning Broward Teachers Union President Anna Fusco. Thank you guys for acting on this swiftly and quickly. Scott Travis uncovers something. I have
to agree to him. I was con I'm concerned how it's being put out there to the public that it may ruin it for the next time we need to go out there for what the purpose of it was for. You don't need a history lesson on it. It was clear the first referendum always safety
and security, mental health, and to go to the educators and support staff that are school-based that are meeting the needs of the children and the students to help offset their salaries. We know there's been a large struggle throughout our legislative government on getting
money to our public schools to be able to give adequate raises. Every superintendent has come forward and through in our previous boards of making sure that our that our teachers and our support staff get a raise. This year we've been told you directed no raise
zero and to come in and have us pay into our insurance premiums and hefty payments no less. Then we hear this. I need you to hear me clearly. You guys were said to have directed. I I don't want to believe that. All I hear from
you is that we want you to get a raise. We're trying to find the money. Then I hear that it's blamed on the backs of the employees because of scheduling and personalization courses and extra periods and they're doing the work. They made the school district an A. Then we
get our top people getting the the large amount of increases more than any educator. Our $15 an hour wage earners, our safety and security that make maybe $13 to $18 an hour are ones that hold guns that are protecting us.
And then when I go calls to this group, they can't direct their principles. They can't tell their princ. Why do you have them? How many of those have to say it? You want to save an easy 10 million? Start there. I'm not going to keep stopping to say it. I'm not blaming the
board for this large mistake, but you need to wake up when I get up here and say it over and over and over and over. You got a select group of staff that all they do is feed you BS. I talked to almost every one of you yesterday
and I think you got an understanding that you're seeing what I'm saying. I have never lied. I have never made a mistake. Purposeful. I have made mistakes and I'll own it in a second. I could truly be an ass, but I have integrity and I call it where it is. This is a large
mistake. It needs to be fixed. Our public loves Brower County Public School educators and support staff and they know that they need to be paid better. We know that there's a struggle happening from Tallahassee and you're not the fault. And I'm not faulting you now, but you better take action on the
ones that need to be faulted. That needs to happen and needs to show today. That concludes comments. >> Please maintain decorum in the audience. Thank you. [snorts] >> Okay. Um since I I brought this item,
I'll start. Um, I cannot say emphatically enough how important this referendum is to our schools, our teachers, our principles and APS,
the people who have direct daily impacts on our kids benefit immensely from this referendum. And the voters knew that when they entrusted us with that money. I urge my colleagues to keep this in
mind during our discussion today. We have to go back out in less than a year to ask voters to support our schools once again. And it is what they hear from us that will help them decide if they can continue to trust us to to
deliver for our students. >> [snorts] >> These last few weeks have been really noisy and if we focus on sound bites and fingerpointing and whose head we're going to have next, our kids will
suffer. [snorts] It is incumbent on us as a board to cut through that noise and do the work. We need to set the tone to be the adults in the room and work with the
superintendent and staff to solve our problems. I have some questions and then some motions I will make. Dr. Heepern, in 2023 when we were discussing the ESMAB supplements, why did we settle on supplements for
employees band D and below? So I I'll uh base my recollection on watching the um the actual meeting. I wasn't here in 2023, but based on what I watched, it was about ensuring that um the top earners as far as administrative
staff uh were not receiving the supplement and to focus on um >> please can I have decorum in the audience >> and to focus on school-based employees, frontline staff and people who directly support schools. And so pay band D um
and below are mostly your um directors and below in the system. >> Okay. I'm wondering if anyone who was here at the time who worked in that department could provide some more detail on why we settled on band D.
>> Um is Mr. Aaro in the room? Yes. If you can Mr. Azrito if you were here if you were here then and if you can recall any information. >> So good morning David Azrito executive director professional practices and labor relations. So with some of our labor groups our TSPs for instance some
of them are earning over six figures. I believe that was the reason to to stop it at at pay band D because those directors were some of our TSP employees make the same as some of our directors. I think that's why we started at that level down. >> Thank you.
Did the board at any time before July 30th, 2024 give any direction to include pay bands above pan pay? >> Um, not for myself, not that I can recall. Um, and Mr. Aarto, if there I
know you were HR chief at that time if you >> is that specifically to 23? >> No, 2024 prior to the board meeting. In the in the period of time between >> I believe it was August of 2023 when we voted on the original item um and July 30th of 2024 did the board give any
direction that we wanted to include pay bands above payband D? >> Not that I recall. >> Okay. So I'm going to move to direct the superintendent to investigate the circumstances under which an item was presented contrary to board direction in it to implement corrective measures ensuring that board directives are not
overridden by staff in the future. >> Second. Moved by Miss Leonardi, seconded by Dr. Zean. Public comment on the motion. [snorts] >> Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. Uh, so it's 2026
and we should be learning lessons. I know one thing I will not tolerate is gaslighting. So, as one of the adults in the room, I'm going to reiterate a lesson you should have learned in 2025.
The fox cannot go out and check on why the chickens are dead. They just cannot. All recommendations that you act upon, your chief of staff told the Sun
Sentinel that board action is what gave ES&T the raises. And board action can only occur from your superintendent making a recommendation. Madam chair, there is no saving your superintendent. So please stop trying cuz that's worry
about yourself, not about him. He made these decisions. He brought these recommendations. So no, it should go to the IG, refer it externally. >> Any other additional public comment? >> Terry Lopez Price. Um, I I I forgot to
say happy new year and thank you for all you do, but I'm saying it now. Um, I was there when this happened and I remember we we we had no idea why everybody from Pay Band D under was getting the money.
uh Broward Teacher Union who was the major action mover in getting the referendum along with our board members at the time were not expecting that and not in agreement to that at that time. So I'm not even sure why that happened.
But if that is the only thing that's in writing, then yes, you have to question what's going on and how does this come to the board to make you guys look like you're doing it. And as I said last week, you are getting advice from people
who've been here longer than most of you save Nora. And they are giving you many times information that is misleading at best and lies at worst. >> Thank you. Any other public comment?
>> Uh Dr. Trudy Germanovich. Um, I also wanted to just point out that it uh this should be a lesson learned. You do have a bond issue coming up. If you want to give those people that make over $100,000
for whatever reason part of that bond issue, I guarantee it won't pass. So please think about what you're doing and make sure that you put schoolbased only and I don't think you can just say
okay well this group because they make over I I think it's amazing that the TSPs make more than most teachers double most what most teachers make. So let's think about all of those things.
Leave it to teachers and the school staff. Thank you. >> Any other public comment on the motion? >> The motion is on an investigation. [clears throat] >> Okay. Anna Fusco, teachers union president. Um I think you should take
the superintendent out of it. He doesn't like to get into certain investigations and put his mitts in it. So you should go right to the inspector general. Let's do it. Let's do it. That way there's no problems and he he can't be, you know,
charged with anything or implicated. Let and let these Why do we have them? Did we not vote to have this particular piece in our Broward schools when we need investigations? So, I'm asking you to someone amend the
motion and have the inspector general do it. Let's do that. That way it keeps Howard Heepburn, you know, hands out of it. I mean, if we want to be frank, the superintendent is his agenda. He runs
the agendas. He moves the agenda, right? So, I'm asking someone to step up and amend it. Any other public comment on the motion? I would like to speak briefly on the motion and then I'll go to board member
comment. Um, I uh struggled with who and and I'm sure that this will come up and I think this board will will sus a lot of this out. Who should do the investigation? The reason I landed on the superintendent
um and his staff in whatever way he sees fit to do the investigation is because this is not a new issue. This has happened under multiple different superintendent, multiple different boards where staff has done something
contrary to board direction [snorts] um or without board direction that that should have required board direction. That's why I my motion was to direct the superintendent, but I'm sure as a board we can come up with a positive solution
moving forward. Miss Hixon, >> thank you and thank you for the motion. I I don't necessarily disagree with sending it to the IG. The problem with that is they pick and choose what they investigate and we can send it there.
We're still waiting on something that we sent over a year ago that they had didn't even they we don't even know if they're investigating it or not. So, there's an issue with sending it to the IG because we would like to have answers quickly. So, I would make a an alternate
suggestion to have the auditor um because they work separately for us. So, I'd like to make an a motion to amend your motion to have the auditor do an [clears throat] initial investigation. We could send it to the IG as well, but
to know that somebody's working on it immediately, the auditor could at least flush out some of that information and then we could move forward from there. But I think that um it does make sense to take the superintendent out of it because we are asking about something we
believe the superintendent might have done. >> So substitute motion be my by Miss Hixon to have the auditor uh investigate. Would you like to keep the same language I included >> and and I and I would say send it to the IG to do both. >> Okay. So to have the auditor and the IG
uh investigate the circumstances under which an item was presented contrary to board direction and to implement corrective measures ensuring that board directives are not overridden by this by staff in the future. >> Yes. >> Seconded by Miss Rert. Public comment on the motion. [snorts] Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation,
Florida. Um I support the motion and thank you Mrs. Hixon. uh because obviously it needs to be independent of the superintendent and I totally understand the frustration of waiting for the IG. Uh someone needs to go light a fire over there. Uh I don't know if
the state attorney's office could also be looking because like I said, fraud by omission is what this reeks of. Um the problem of course with it only being internal and why it should also go to the IG is your chief auditor cannot put
people under um under oath and [snorts] there are people that need to be interrogated until they they squeal on who omitted this language. That's just where we are. And again recommendations
come from the superintendent. So it must be independent of the superintendent. The chief auditor does not report to the superintendent. Um so I support the motion and I hope the IG is listening. >> Thank you. Any additional public
comment? >> Terry Pys, we are getting closer. Thank you. Appreciate it very much. And um just something that I keep on saying because I've been here for so long is
that the people who sit on the deis rotate. People who sit other places, they're not rotating. So I just think that you guys need to look into that. We've been saying it.
I've been saying it. President Fusco's been saying it. I don't want to throw anybody under the bus, but I've been asking for more than 10 years. You want to find out who the liar is? Let's get everybody in a room and let's talk. All of us. And no one's ever been willing to
do that. Not when I've asked for it, not when President Fusco's asked for it. No one's ever been willing to get everybody in the room to find out who the liar is, who's telling who what. So hopefully this will be a very big awakening. And I thank all of you for
your genuiness. Any other public comment? >> Anna Fusco teachers union president. I respect your sentiment uh Hixon, Mrs. Hixon, about um getting it done timely. I like it to get done right. I think we've been sitting at multiple board
meetings, multiple board meetings about the due process and the investigations not being done correctly. I'm dealing with a major one right now that I have told spoke to some of you that I want to bring to your attention after this debacle is done.
of what some of your teams are doing on how they choose and pick to investigate, notice people, question people, question certain people, not question, not even asking the accused.
I'm watching people look at me and I know you all have superior intelligence and you're all are great people. All of you. We all have our flaws and I know you are elected and you have to do the right thing and you want to do the right thing and you are doing the right thing. Just
different flavors come together on this that it needs to be out of everybody's hand in Brower County public school. >> Any other public speakers? >> Board discussion. Dr. Zean. >> Thank you, Chair. Um just to clarify, um chair, if we could
make sure that this is uh motion is about the Broward IG and not any other IG. Is that correct? Correct. >> Terrific. I mean, it's important. There's a lot of IG's and and some, you know, operate and have different skill sets, you know, on their staff. The
Broward IG is like laser focused on fraud, waste, and abuse. I mean, this is kind of all about the efficiency and effectiveness of local government organizations. So this is good uh for them to look in. But I think that we have one, you know, kind of superior option with the chief auditor uh largely
because the chief auditor for the amount of time that he's remaining with us spent years working in an IG organization. So when we think about an individual who's leading the organization and getting into you know issues about culture and and and ethics and morality even uh I think we actually
have a great single candidate and um you know I would support uh a chief auditor review largely because of their background uh in the inspector general world because of their superior service recently on the CMA solicitation work which I found just to be top-notch you
know work not only high quality but quick. Um, and I think the public wants something quick. I think the public wants to know what happened with this. I I recommend, excuse me, I commend the chair uh for being very direct and and u uh clear about the expectations that she
has and I think that this board uh uh this board member at least shares them. Um, so I uh I just am seeking just a little bit more clarity. If in fact the chief auditor uh and staff does this investigation and they come back and
give us a complete uh answer, is the intent to also uh send this to the Broward County Inspector General? Yes, the intent is to have the auditor work on it, but also send it to the IG because as we've heard, people would we
do pay the IG to do this exact work. My concern is that every time we've sent something there, >> we don't have any control on what that timeline is and it's been long. So, I don't want to just rely on IG. I as I as
you mentioned and I mentioned I think we would have a quicker turnaround and I don't have an issue with just the auditor. I just think for public interest they would like to see someone also outside the district look into the to the item.
>> Uh I appreciate that but I think our chief auditor is outside of super superintendent supervision. I mean the chief auditor works for the school board. he still works for the school board in >> I'm I'm with you and I think that um I I'm not opposed to the motion. I just
don't feel like um like duplicating the person getting this task is going to be consistent with our own standards of efficiency and effectiveness. I'd rather go to the chief auditor to get the report. I mean he did the last report in a couple weeks which is really remarkable. I hope he can do something
like that again. This is I think chair a single instance that we're asking him to investigate. Is that fair? >> That would be the maker of the motion. That was my intent of the original motion. >> Terrific. And I and and I think she carried forward your language. So if it was your original intent to do this uh
individual event investigation, I think that that may even be faster than one that was looking at an entire process that lasted nine months. Um so uh I'm not opposed to the motion. I just I just uh um am really looking forward to the chief auditor's report. um uh because of
their experience as an inspector general uh staff member and because of the very proud service he did recently on another investigation. So thanks chair >> Miss Thompson. >> I just wanted to clarify or could you reread the motion
>> slowly? Um, it was to move to direct the chief auditor and to refer this item to the Broward OIG to investigate the circumstances under which an item was presented contrary to board direction
and to implement corrective measures, ensuring that board directives are not overridden by staff in the future. So, Mike, I'm um okay with both the chief auditor and the sending it forward to the Broward OIG. Um the chief auditor
can't implement corrective changes though. So, would >> that's why my motion was to direct the superintendent? >> Yeah. So, is does a line need to be added then that then the superintendent makes recommendations or how do we move forward?
So I you could I think the chief auditor if I'm not mistaken in other audits has given recommendations on how you could improve the system. So if you left it the way it was it wouldn't be to implement changes but maybe suggest
changes that the superintendent would then implement or the board would look at them first and >> decide but I think the auditor tech usually gives suggestions on how you can improve. So >> whatever the issue is >> then potentially make it provide
suggestions to the board to take action on >> as opposed to >> to implement. >> Yeah, >> that's my only >> catching that. >> Thank you, Mr. Civera. >> I'm going to reserve my comments till after the motion is voted on. >> All right. Any other board comment on the motion?
>> Mrs. Alhadef. >> Yes. I would just like the auditor to speak to this as far as, you know, everything you have that you're currently auditing and the timing to execute this.
>> Yes, ma'am. Uh Mark Maggley, executive director of audits. Um relative to lots that's been going on, obviously the timeline on the last one, we we worked as hard as fast as we possibly could in in amongst the holiday season and all the things that were going on and we were happy to be able to provide that.
Obviously resources are what they are for our normal flow of activities. Um relative to both discussions and I won't speak on behalf of the inspector general but all of you know that I have a background there also. Um an excellent organization very thorough um time does
play into that. Um relative to our current then we have the audit plan which we're still trying to execute on a daily basis our our general regulatory things and compliance audits um that we have to complete. So, we are limited to do investigations to a degree. We have
some folks that can go real hard and fast as we possibly can. I don't know if that answers your question. We have certainly obviously you have an approved audit plan that we we adhere to as best we can under the circumstances. >> My no it doesn't really answer my question. So, as far as the timing and
executing this with your current audit audit plan, do you foresee you being able to integrate this and to be able to execute this in a timely manner? >> I I mean, I wouldn't know what your representation of timely is. I think we
could get it in a matter of, you know, weeks as we did um in a limited scope of review as as Dr. Zema had indicated. >> But I would also have to confer with the chief auditor uh you know about what our schedule is. But that would be my intent and I think we could execute that.
>> Okay. Thank you, Dr. Zean. >> Thanks so much, Chair. Procedural matter. Thompson had >> Thank you. First day on the job. Sorry. Miss Thompson had a u suggested
modification. I'm just Did that get accepted? Is that the one that we're have on the table today? >> Yes, I accept that to the motion. Terrific. And just so we're all clear exactly on what the motion is, M. Leonardi, could you read it one more time? >> To direct the chief auditor and to refer
the matter uh to the Broward OIG to investigate the circumstances under which an item was presented to the contrary to board direction and recommend corrective measures to the board. >> Thank you. I support this,
>> Miss Rupert. Thank you. Um, I actually have a question for the attorney. Um, when when would it be proper uh to actually send this off to the AG?
>> No, auditor general state auditor general. >> Well, to the state. >> Yeah, state. >> I'm going to have to look into that. I'm not sure if there's any timing requirements or pre-erequisites to that. So I at the top of my head I can't tell you that.
>> Right. And and the reason I ask is is this um I have seen this before too many times and there's a lot of promises made and then nothing happens and it goes back to
business as it was before. So um I wholeheartedly support this going to our auditor. I have full confidence in our auditing department. Um, very much so. And where would we be right now if they hadn't been brave enough, and I'm just
going to say it, brave enough to tell the truth, to do the investigation, and to follow through? That took a lot of gumption. And um, yes, it's their job, but if if your job is suddenly a very hot seat, it
gets difficult to sit there. But that's what we have to do. So, um that is that is it from my perspective is I've seen this before. I I don't understand how this is going to be different. Um and I really don't think it's enough. I I do
appreciate that um we are taking it away from the the superintendent's purview and going through the other steps first because um that would be from my perspective inappropriate to do uh if we left the
superintendent to direct. Um so that's I'll say more after the the um amendment goes through or not. I'll uh withhold the rest of my comments. Um, Dr. Holes, do you have I know your
hand is up uh to speak on the substitute motion or the item as a whole. >> Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. Can you hear me clearly? >> Yes. >> Okay, great. So, I just want to um to ask a couple of questions and then I may
have some additional questions on the um original item. >> We're still in the substitute motion. So, >> correct. Yes. Um, so I'll I'll address the substitute motion and thank you, Madam Chair, for crafting the original version and board member Hixon for your
substitute. Um, I just wanted to to find out from the superintendent um uh for the sake of the public uh do you believe um that in reference to the um referendum supplements that it was
carried out contrary to board direction? Um thanks for the question Dr. Holdness. U initially no. Um I've when I've heard about this concern I started doing my own review just to look at historical facts of um how the referendum was implemented and up to the point of the
last meeting of where we are now. Um so I'm still doing my own initial review just to figure out how we're at the place that we're we're at right now. >> Okay. So Dr. Dr. Heburn, what what did you understand from the item uh in terms of the referendum supplements? What did
you understand the board's direction to be? >> So, from the uh there's a sequence of meetings starting from uh I guess 2022 of um expansion of the referendum due to the millage rate going up. Uh then to
2023 and um putting the guard rails on making sure pay D goes down. Then we get into 2024. um of how we are here where we are right now which is all um employees. So um I
have to do more research to find out in between 2023 and 2024 were there discussions um to bring the item as such for uh a vote uh on uh July 30, 2024.
>> Okay. So was your understanding of 2024 that the board directed you and staff to include band and above non-school-based employees. >> If repeat that question, Dr. Hus.
>> Okay. So you mentioned 2024. Um, was your understanding in 2024 that the school board direction was to include band and above nonschool-based employee in this um referendum
supplements >> if the board's um so the the only thing I can speak to on 2024 is that um the item and then there's there in the outcome of that item. I I don't know prior to that if there was specific
board direction in the later latter part of 2023 that ultimately got us to where we are in 2024. So, like I said, I'm doing my own review as well just to figure out how we're at the point uh we're at right now because I I have my own personal beliefs on on how the money
should be um distributed to employees. >> Understand, Madam Chair. I just have a question for legal and then I'm I'm I'm done with as far as your motion or Miss Hixon's motion. Uh one of the speakers mentioned legal concerns should changes be made. Can legal speak to that in
terms of this particular um uh motion uh as well as the item? Are there any legal concerns to revising
uh the referendum supplements to to not include um band and above non-school-based employees? >> So, Dr. Holes, I think your question goes back to the main motion. So, do you you want me to answer it now or
>> Madam Chair, would you like her to answer it now or should we wait for the >> I I would like to wait for for for the main item, but yeah. >> All right. No problem. So, you can come back to me for that question and thank you so much, >> Mr. Seivera. So, my understanding seems to be on the
um substitute motion that we're all debating that the chief auditor is going to partake in some type of investigation to determine essentially what went wrong here, if anything, which uh as you'll hear later, I think quite a few number of things went wrong with all of this.
um in reviewing some of the data um apparently our chief auditor uh received some of this supplemental money uh and in all honesty received quite a bit of this supplemental money. So I have a question to our um our general counsel.
Is there a potential conflict in our chief auditor in doing an investigation like this when he in fact has um partaken in uh the distribution of these monies? I mean it raises it raises an interesting point. So I think there
could be >> Mike >> I I respectfully I I think I need an answer on that. Is that is is that an ethical conflict as to whether or not this chief auditor uh can do this when he in fact received
$10,725 in supplemental funds last year. if if if the data I'm relying on um is correct. Uh respectfully, I think we need an answer to this. I am 100% in favor of this going to the IG's office.
Uh I agree there's been some some issues in the past with timing. Uh I don't imagine it's going to get any better in this situation, but uh certainly I think they are the proper office for this. Um, I do respectfully, ma'am, I I do need an answer as to whether or not this poses any potential ethical conflicts before
we can decide as to whether or not to send this to him. >> I would say yes. >> Okay. Thank you for that, >> Miss Bowman. >> Thanks, chair. Um, I guess that was an interesting issue that Mr. Sea brought up. I, you
know, um, in terms of a conflict, I would think of it in terms of did he elect to accept it or is it something that's automatically being deposited into your paycheck? So, was there an affirmative step that he took that would make him have a conflict or is he just
receiving the benefit that everybody else had? Um, and I wouldn't, if it's him personally, I I wouldn't want to take out our ability to quickly investigate this issue. So, when we all acknowledge that we have um a time issue
with the Broward Inspector General, which I also support sending it to, um, but I wouldn't want to limit our ability to immediately act on this. I think that that's very important to the district. And so I'm willing to
take the chance of having a conflict with the auditor general um because I don't think he affirmatively made any decisions regarding this as a benefit that he received passively just like a lot of other people did um and I'm welcome my
colleagues thoughts on that. And I also think um I don't know if we nailed this down, but because of the importance of this, because of the fact that we do uh rely on these referendum funds and we will have to put this back out to the
public again. I think we really need a timeline for the auditor general to return a report for us. Um is it three >> the auditor? Our our auditor chief auditor. Um I think they did how they I think they turned it around in about three
weeks last time, two weeks. Do you I I mean this is an emergency. As much as I love to see how much has been spent in every account in every school, I think that this has got to take precedence and we need is it possible that we can get this turned
around in two or three weeks? I mean, the magnitude of what we would have to do in the in in reviewing this, I I couldn't explain at this point. Obviously, we would do our very best, as we did last time, to try to push the thing through as as it is. We don't pull anybody else off of other projects to do
that, but as far as managing, continuing the work, but I I I can't put a definitive timeline on that to know that we could be complete. Um, we took it as far as we could under the time constraint last time and provided B the facts as we had at that point. We could
meet a deadline but it you know it's all dependent upon things that we discover along the way also. >> Well perhaps we can do an initial audit and then you know set a timeline and then come back and see what if we need to extend the time or you know direct
you at that point of what we need to further investigate. Um does anyone have a I mean I'd like to see this come back as soon as possible. So like three weeks, a month within the month. Does anyone have a
>> Is there an objection to uh this coming back in three weeks? >> No objection. >> Okay. >> So can we add should we add that to the motion or is that okay? >> I think that can be an unders. We've added a lot to this motion now. So >> I mean I just want to have my part.
>> Okay. So that's that's my comments. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I just want to add to that. I don't want to leave it out there that there was something wrong done by the auditor. To Miss Bowman's point, it was a passive thing that occurred that was approved in
July by the board. So, I think I want to just say that um there's a potential I know the auditor has contracts with outside entities that do audit functions. I don't know if that's part of the contracts that you guys have, but maybe as a
as a middle ground for them to refer it to one of the companies they're under contract with. Um I I want to remind everyone what the substitute motion was. So it wasn't to determine whether or not um PayP and
above should receive the supplements. That's not what the investigation would be. It would be they were in they were investigating why something was brought to the board that was contrary to board direction. They were investigating that process. Um the chief auditor was not a
part of the decision of putting this on the agenda. Um so again I I think it's important to remember what this motion is about. Uh and it's an issue that has come up several times during my time on the board. um that things are brought to the board that are or or board direction
is ignored. So that is what the investigation would be into. Um Miss Hixon, thank you. I I was going to point that out also. Just anyone in the district, I mean, every single person except for someone on the board
received some money from the referendum in this past year. That was what happened. And I do remember not agreeing with it, but the discussion happening here on the board in July and there were board members that were very adamant about it. So, um you know, I I think it
is important to find out how it got there so that we can be transparent and I think we'll find that um that it it wasn't as nefarious as it seems to be. But the I don't think there's any ethical issue with the auditor or their
staff because everyone on the staff also received some of that money to do just look into the process. It has nothing to do about whether they took the money, didn't take the money. It was how did the item get to the board. Um, but again, that's why I also said leave the the inspector general because the
auditor is just going to give us information that we can take action on right now and then if there's more things that would happen, we would get that out of the IG. So, I don't think there's an issue with both of them doing it. And I would um not question the
ethics of our auditor in this in any instance really, but in this one, he didn't ask for that. it just became part of what everybody received. Any other board comment? Mr. Sea, >> by the way, for the record, I'm not
necessarily against sending it to the auditor. Um, what I was asking for from our legal council as to whether or not there'd be an ethical or a legal conflict. And um, if the answer to any of those inquiries is yes, I I can't support something that's going to set us
up for for a conflict. I'm not suggesting that Mr. roads or anybody in his office is going to do a bad job or that they're going to skew their findings because he made I have to correct the record because apparently the number that I gave initially was wrong. It's actually $13,576.76 last year. I'm not suggesting that
anything nefarious is going to happen within the auditor's office. I just need to know from our legal counsel whether or not this is a conflict because if it is, I I can't vote to support anything that would be a conflict, whether legally, ethically, whatever the case
may be, I I need your, for lack of better terms, legal opinion as to whether or not you believe this is a conflict because if it is, I can't support it. So given the restatement of the motion that the board is considering right now
and given the limited investigation that he's doing, I don't think that he would have one. Yeah. >> Any other board comment? All in favor of the mo the substitute motion say I. >> I. >> All oppose say no. >> I >> motion passes unanimously with Dr. Holes
online. Um, I have some additional questions uh before we move on. Um, how long have the board's direct reports been eligible for or andor receiving
referendum supplements? Has it been since 2023, 2024? the board direct reports. Um my from my understanding the board direct reports are eligible um for anything that other administrators
receive as far as raises, uh bonuses, whatever the case may be. And so that's written into the the contracts. >> Yeah, I I understand that. But how long have So we you know, we initially voted on referendum supplements for ESMAB. um
some of them are 12-month administrative employees in August of 2023. Did the board direct reports start receiving and or being eligible for the the referend that specific supplement in 2023 or in 20 in after the vote in July 2024?
>> That that uh that's a negative for 2023 because it was pay D and below um affirmative uh for board action in 24. Um go ahead Miss Sullivan if you have something different. >> I I believe I understand the question. So 2324 to what as the soup stated it
was a pay band D and below. I just uh maybe this is a question for legal. I don't know how that transpires as it relates to your direct reports uh contracts where it says they're eligible for ESMAP. So I don't know if the DM below would exclude necessary your direct reports.
>> Right. So I'm wondering if someone from HR can clarify when those direct reports started receiving that supplement. So to best of my knowledge, I believe they didn't start receiving it until the board voted for three years for the 24,
25, 25, 26, and 26, 27. And that item, I believe that's when the direct reports um were eligible for it, but the superintendent did not elect to receive those payments. >> So they only became eligible after the vote on July 30th, 2024, which expanded it.
>> Again, I think that's a question for legal. I don't know if the disqualifier for uh above pay grant pay would disqualify your direct reports based on the language in their contract. >> Miss Moore, can you opine?
So, the language in the contract does say that um each legal contract that we have has language in it that says that we're going to receive the same um increases that other uh non-bargain units would
receive. So, it doesn't we are not tied to a salary band. We're tied contractually to a set salary that's determined by the contract. So I mean I think that's something that you know you guys should be aware of. There are separate contracts for the legal
department each of the the councils >> and it's not just the legal department. Um >> yeah this the direct reports as well. Yes. >> Yeah. >> So again help me understand. So now this opens up a whole can of questions that I have.
So, were the people in the legal department who have that in their contract, were they receiving the supplements in 2023 before? And I I can't remember the year that the contracts were amended where that language was included that it would
be the same as other people by operation of, you know, by ministerial operation. Before that, it was a board item. So it would come back to the board to get the same thing that the other um non-bargain units received. >> So it's a separate board item each year.
>> So help me. Oh, go ahead, Mr. Sullivan. >> I was going to say if you want to move on to another question, we're going to we can do the research, but it's going to take us a minute to see when uh the legal started getting the referendum. I don't believe it was the 2324, but we need to verify. And I guess my question
is that is that just because of a mistake or is that because the contract started coming to us differently? Like because that's going to impact motions that are made today. >> I believe that's >> so I don't know if those those increases came from referendum dollars. So I guess that's a different question for staff to
answer. I believe those increases were from a different fund source prior to 2024. >> I was just speaking specifically about referendum supplements. I'm not sure what the I believe everyone gets the uh another compensation raises. Everyone in their contract is entitled to what everybody else gets.
>> So for referendum, I don't believe it was before 2024. >> Um >> and it and I would like to know the the rationale behind that. Like was that because of a mistake that was made and really they should have been re receiving it before then because of the language of everything? >> I believe that it's just in line with
what the board action was and what's in uh in the contracts. >> Okay. So if you could do some research and help me understand. >> HR is going to check right now when the referendum payment started for uh legal just to confirm that it was 2425. >> All right. So then my next question is
for legal. Um so in July of 2024 we had voted to extend the ESMAB supplements by 3 years um like other employee groups and some questions were ra raised um by representation today about uh the
legality of undoing that. So, I'm wondering how do we go back to what the board had originally voted on in 2023, excluding band D and making it so that the highest paid employees
uh are not receiving this supplement. How do we do that? Like, is that through uh bringing back that item from July 30th, 2024? Is that amending the salary schedules or both? or can we do a motion on this item?
>> So, if I'm understanding the question, are you looking at a path forward or are you looking to do something retroactive? >> I'm looking at a path forward. >> So, right now what the LA the latest thing that the board has approved is um the three years
5 a.5% for COPA, BPAA and ESMAB. Um, so you could do a motion to amend whatever the prior motion was to figure out your date, timeline, and your path
forward. That that would be my recommendation to amend the action. >> Okay. So, could we do that through a motion on this item or should we do we need to bring back that item from July of 2024? >> I would recommend bringing back the item. >> Okay. And so if we were able if I opened
up the agenda, would I be able to do that? Bring back that item today? I think that I think that approach may be stickier because that wasn't on the notice for today's agenda, but you did notice that the discussion would
be taking place today on the matter. So I would say what would be your motion? I think I would need to understand what what you would propose. Um, so it would be to amend the ESMAB
supplements moving I think it would be for the 2020 5 26 school year and then the 26 27 school year
um to amend it to to include only pay band D and below. So, we're midway in the 2526 school year and there are contracts that are in the, you know, in the works that have that
language in there that says that they're going to get the same. I think it's going to be harder to like structure it midstream. I don't know if staff is able to figure out what's left on payments for the next 6 months. I don't know. But I know that there are
one-year contracts that right now expire in June. So, if you were to structure it to include this current school year, it may get stickier and how to apply it for staff. I don't know, maybe staff could speak to how to do that.
>> I mean, I whether or not it's sticky or possible is my my question because if it's possible, then I want to do it starting today. >> So, here's the the rub. The language in the contract says that and let me let me
just pull it. >> I'll call you. >> So, it's similar to the language in the general counsel's contract that's coming before the board today. It it essentially says that during each term of the agreement, the compensation shall
be increased by the percentage of salary increase or other compensation increase provided to other 12-month administrative employees of the board. If you keep that as is, you're going to have some 12-month employees of the board that are getting the increase
because they're below the salary band, and you'll have others that are above the band that are not. And so you'll have contract language that is going to be difficult to apply because both scenarios would exist. There would be some that get 12-month
increase, some that do not. And so if the intent is that those people in that higher band don't get it, the contract language would still indicate that it might be applicable. >> So then do we need to bring back all those contracts? I mean I whose contracts I mean you have
all the direct report contracts, you have the the attorneys contracts and you bring back all >> talking about do I need to do we need which brings me back to the original question like back in 2023 when we voted on this were all these these eligible employees getting this money um or were
they not? Because I'm being we've been told two different stories, right? that it didn't the direct reports didn't uh so let's just keep this simple for the direct reports. So say we only bring back the direct report contracts. We've been told that the direct reports were not getting this money in in after the
vote in August of 23 because it excluded paid band D. But now we're being told that the that contract language is in conflict with uh with the item. So why was it not in conflict back then?
But it is in conflict now. >> I don't think it would be because you didn't you didn't have that broader language. I mean, you didn't have the broader implication until 2024. So, you expanded it in 2024. In 2023,
you had specifications around who got it. >> Yeah. So, I don't believe >> how do we put those specifications back into place? So I guess we would need the answer to whether it was paid on on referendum prior to 2024 because I don't believe it was paid under referendum.
>> Mr. Sullivan. >> All right. So I confirmed with HR in 20 2023 2024 when it was limited to pay ban uh D and below for ASMAP employees. uh the associate general counsel uh attorneys did get it and the thought
process there was there uh pretty much in line with the the compensation of directors but the GC or the deputy uh did not receive it in the 232 24 >> here we go >> can you repeat that the first part
>> sure so in the 20 2023 2024 when it was limited to uh pay band D or below the associate uh general counsel's members did get it because their compensation is aligned to uh directors, but the GC and the deputy did not receive uh
supplements. They didn't start receiving those supplements until the 2425 school year, >> and that's because most of the office fell below that that salary band. >> Okay. So, what it would it would just be to go back to the PBMD,
>> correct? >> So, then do we do so then I go back to my original question. Do I need to open up the agenda, bring back the item from July 30th, 2024, or can we just do it as a motion on this item? >> I believe you can just do a motion on this item. I just want to make sure and I don't know the the numbers of my
colleagues, so I can't speak to that. I don't know if everyone falls under pay. That's the ultimate. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Because I don't want to have that that inconsistency in the contract interpretation. Yeah. >> All right. So, I move uh to amend the
ESMAB agreements starting today, moving forward to the 2526 school year and 2627 school year to be for pay ban D and below as we voted in Jul in August
of 2023. >> Second. >> Second. Moved by Miss Leonardi, second by Dr. Zean. Public comment on the motion. But before you take public comment, are are you just speaking to ASMAB specifically or BPA and COPA as well because those three specifically that
was not in the BPA items as I remember >> as >> just it was not right. The pay band was not in BPA. Correct. >> Okay. >> It's just as ma'am. >> Thank you for that clarification. >> Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. Um I support the motion and
also wanted to clarify on the motion because there's been talk that you approved um expanding it from pay band D to everybody. That is not in writing. That is not in discussion. So what you're doing is returning it to the way it
should be. And I'm not understanding the concerns because I have a feeling that um if Mr. Tingum comes up. I never said that you approved it. From my perspective, you never approved expanding it above pay D because you have to know what you're approving. And
if you didn't know because it wasn't disclosed, it's not written or discussed, then how could there possibly be a legal concern if there's a potential for fraud in how it was implemented to begin with? Uh, but I support the motion and I support it
stopping today. And then you also need to address the very vague language in all of your general counsel office contracts. >> Any other public comment on the item? >> Pete Tingum, executive director risk. Ma'am, I just want to point out a couple
of things here which I think needs to be said. First of all, I'd like to make the board know that if the money paid to these employees was distributed among the entire schoolboard eligible
employees, it would amount to less than a dollar a month. It's not a big ticket item in that respect. The other item that I wanted, this board has consistently negotiated individual
contracts with the chief auditor, the general counsel, and other people. And as they do that, we've had to expand the pay schedule to include we went from E,
which was executive, then we put in S, and now we put in T. all those things because the board had an individual they wanted to pay more money to. It's also been very consistent that people that leave the district and come back are
compensated more or an outside hire is compensated more. >> Thank you. >> So I just want you to remember that and I don't think you can reig on the promise you made >> back when and by stopping this now I suggest that there may be legal action. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Um, my name's uh Dr. Trudy Germanovich. Um, this discussion of course is convoluted, but um, I still believe that you should have not a pay band, you should have a pay cap.
If you did that, then it's fair for everybody, including teachers. And I'm not saying and again I'm not saying principles because principles will make over the hundred thousand say or something like that but to always try to
finagle with all these different groups with D's and Fs and P's and S's going on. [laughter] How are you how are you going to figure this out? So I would suggest that you put a pay cap in if you can recall the
item and do that. I don't know >> any other public comment. >> Yes, >> Terry Lopez Price, thank you for all of your work on this mental work. Um, I would just like to say I appreciate the efforts to go back to what it was, which
in my opinion should never have been band below, but that's a topic for another thing. As far as the contracts go and the contract language, I just want to make a mention because I'm in all the negotiations. The contract language to um, you know, getting the
percentage that other employees get is really separate from the referendum. We have always negotiated separately. So, so that is shouldn't come into play in my opinion. Something to think about for the attorneys that shouldn't come into
play if you're adding referendum money to the teachers or to this band or that band. It's really not the same as the percentage that everyone gets. It should be looked at differently, separately. That's what I gain from negotiations.
That's what I see. That's what I perceive. Any other public comment? >> Yes. >> Anna Fusco, teacher junior president. Um, again, what Natalie said, you're not going against what something you promised that Mr. Tingum clarified
because you were basically duped. I mean, I don't want to mince words. I'm being matter of fact more than ever today. Um, also look into for next year. Don't just stop right now. look for next year of what you're going
forward on. And referendum is definitely separate. It should be separate from all contracts unless you agree to put it in the contract which is negotiate it. And the only groups that have negotiating powers are
your union groups. Now, I know you do some individualities with, you know, you've got some general counsel things coming up uh after this. So we know that there are some examples. So um in favor of this motion moving forward and I hope all of you are too.
Any other public comment? Board member discussion. Miss Hixon. [snorts] Thank you. And first, I just think it's important to say none of I I don't think any of us are trying to say that pay band D and above don't work
hard, that they don't um you know, deserve some recognition. But I think what's important here is the public perception. And it it isn't a lot of money. I mean, we we both Dr. Zean and I asked for it and it turns out to be
$300,000 which is is a lot of money but not in terms of what our budget is. This isn't really about that. This is about what the public voted for and that we have to be sure as elected officials we
are doing what the public expected of us. And and the second and I want to be clear on a couple things. The first ref referendum very much excluded anybody except for people who were in the school. Very um intentionally when we went out
for the second referendum, the language was changed to be expanded to say staff so that we could include the principles and the assistant principles. And that really was the intention of that change. And then it turned into um a lot of
other people in there. And and I I believe as a board member and I said it when we voted on it before, this should be people who touch students. It should be people who directly touch students. That's what the voters voted for. So it's important that we fix the action.
And and I don't want anyone to think it is because we don't feel that the upper level management is not deserving of things. It's just not what the voters voted for. So, um I I do have a little concern about changing it right now just
because um I I just have a little con I have concern about that. It doesn't mean that I don't I won't support this, but I I definitely want to see it change for next year. But I also have some concerns that I had when we first voted on it.
And teachers don't get percentages. they get there's a there's a fixed for your in this level this many years you get this number you get that number and when we had this discussion 5.5 was because it was equitable and all of that if you do the math this is completely
inequitable 5.5% of $200,000 is way higher than 5% of $50,000 so I I don't know if now is the right time there's another way to do this but I really think that it should be fixed for the other employees
that there's there should be no one getting more money from the referendum than the teachers. And that's the way that it was voted on by the voters. So, I don't have a problem sharing it with other groups. But if if the highest
teacher is getting $10,000, there should not be one other person in the district that is getting more than $10,000. And I don't know how to structure that, but I really think that that would bring the transparency to this and that when we go
out in the following years that the voters would understand that we know what they voted for and that we're we're bringing that through um in the way that they expected it. So, I don't know that I'll do another motion right now, but I do think that if we're opening this up
and changing it, that if teachers are getting a fixed rate based on a scale that was negotiated, I I don't know if now is the time, but I would like to suggest that we do that for this one as well. >> Maybe you want to bring that at up at
the end of the meeting, Miss Thompson. >> Thank you, chair. Um, I have a couple questions and then just my recollection and obviously I wasn't on the board, but I think some of this stemmed from my predecessor bringing up
the comment that all employees should get this referendum dollars. Um, so I think that that's some history that I think we also need to take some accountability as as a board that there was a discussion about all employees
getting it, which would include everybody. Um, I have I think if we're going to structure this and maybe I'll bring it up if Miss Hixon brings a motion, but limiting it to people who touch or who work directly
with students, I want to make sure we're including custodians and bus drivers and counselors and social workers because they're considered itinerant. So, they would be district employees if you look at their contract, but they are working with our students every day. Um, so I
had questions. I also have concerns about stopping it midyear. Um, but I'm not necessarily opposed. If we stopped it today, what happens with the
additional money? >> Dr. Heepard. >> Um, that that is a great question. Um, currently it's allocated to the purpose it's being used for right now. Um, Miss Miss Johnson, um, would it just be
unallocated referendums that the board could direct us to use for specific purposes? >> Correct. But as you know, we're spending over the allocated budget. So, it will be offsetting the overage in the fund
balance that we're spending. So, but it's I and I >> still would be noted as referendum, but the impact on the fund balance overall, all of the referendum in the general fund is combined. So, you got a combined
fund balance and any assets from the referendum be part of the fund balance allocation, but you be having an offset, right? >> Yeah. because whatever the general fund overspend is still going to impact your fund balance even though you have a a little
overage in the in the referendum. >> And I I understand the financial concerns. I think it would be extremely wrong of us to to keep to take that money away from employees and then not give it back in some way as determined
by the voters. Um, so I think if it were to stop today, which I I think I think the concerns is that people not are are direct reports, right? There are still people getting this referendum dollars that maybe budgeted their money
in a certain way and kind of thought that this money was coming. So stopping it midyear doesn't feel good. Um, however, if that is what my colleagues agree, I think that that money needs to then somehow be directed to the people
that we determine qualify for. So, our our teachers are under the PBND if that's the language we're going with. Um, so I'd love to hear people's uh my colleagues response to that. Um, >> so basically to keep the referendum dollars going to the teachers and the
pay band and below. And then with the general counsel's contract language, I understand that it matches the the 12 months. Who negotiates not our general counsels, but who negotiates the legal team's contracts?
That comes before us as well. Um, so then would it make sense for when the contract's done to change that 12-month language so that it it no longer mirrors it, I guess, is my question for my
colleagues, not necessarily legal. And then that's it. And I just wanted to clarify, so the motion was specifically to ESMA. So, we wouldn't be making if if the motion passes, we wouldn't be making changes to anyone who who is currently
receiving the referendum who impacts who touches students. >> Um, so I just want to be clear on that and I know Dr. Heburn wanted to say something. >> No, I was going to um provide some comment to what Miss um Thompson was talking about as far as use of the funds. There are other categories that
the referendum supports, mental health, safety, and security. So that money could go for initiatives in some of the other areas that the referendum um supports. I'm kind of considering what Mr. Tenum talked about. If you spread it out amongst employees is about about for the rest of the employees about a dollar
a month. So it may be um able to use to support some of the other initiatives that actually support students. >> Just just a comment. >> All right. Mr. Sea, >> would you like to go first? Mr. Rupert. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you, chair. Um, got some things to say on this that I think are important. Uh, obviously this this needs to be corrected and adjusted um, ASAP as in right now at this meeting and and I hope I have the support of my colleagues uh,
moving forward in making the appropriate adjustments that are needed here. This supplemental money should have been used for two categories of employees in this district. teachers and school staff uh such as administrators, cafeteria workers, front office workers, bus
drivers, the district employees who um e who are on site or either deal with our kids on a day-to-day basis. This money should have never been utilized for anybody who is not in one of these two categories [clears throat] and certainly not for
anybody who works in this building. If you are not interacting with a child on a daily basis, this money should have never been given to you. Period. Full stop. We can't we can't afford to give our teachers proper raises. Yet, we want to
take this supplemental money away from them and give it to other folks who make a lot more money than some of us sitting up here on the dis. Now, I was not on the board in 2022 when the citizens of uh Broward County voted for this
referendum money. Uh, however, I can guarantee you that if I stood outside that polling station and I asked the people coming out what they thought they were voting for and what they thought the referendum meant, I guarantee you that every single one of them would have told me that they thought the money was
going to the teachers or at the very least school-based staff. How we got to this point, I don't know. I wasn't here. But I am here now and I do have a vote and my vote is going to be to change this. With all due respect to the cabinet
level staff in the front row, this money is not for you. It was never for anyone other than for our great teachers and for our school-based staff. This is another huge misstep for this district. This is another black eye. This is another reason for this public not to
trust us. I'm glad we had this discussion about the investigation and this is getting turned over to the proper authorities to figure out what the hell went wrong on this. And I hope those results uh are substantive and are timely.
But we really need to know how did we get here? who decided that the employees at KC at the KC Wright building making six figure salaries were entitled to referendum money. Employees who are in a 24 or 32% tax bracket have no business receiving these supplemental funds.
Period. I have teachers in my district who have to wait tables at night just to make ends meet and pay the rent. And I bet you chair they really could have used the supplemental funds and these supplemental funds should have gone to them. This whole fiasco, in one word,
unacceptable. This needs to be fixed today. Not at another meeting, not at another workshop, not the next time we all get together. This needs to be fixed today. And I hope I have the support of all of my colleagues because to me, this is a
no-brainer. Give the money to the teachers. Give the money to our schoolbased staff. Everybody else should not be entitled to this. Thank you. Miss Rupert,
>> thank you. Um, I don't have a a problem making this correction today. I don't have a problem um having it be effective as of today. Um, I have a little bit of perspective when it comes to a mistake
in your paycheck that you weren't really supposed to get. Um, a couple years ago, um, the board mistakenly got paid over a four or six month period of time and we were immediately
um, notified that it happened and we needed to pay it up and pay back the money that had um, had come erroneously into our paycheck. Um, I don't know how that mistake happened and I certainly don't know how this mistake is. My point is the board was extremely efficient and
said, "Listen, of course that's, you know what, what's going on here?" Um, so we did rectify it that day and we did pay back that money. I'm not saying that we want the the um money to be paid back. I'm just saying from this point
forward, we need to make that uh happen for the pe for our our teachers, our students, our staff, the people who are boots on the ground and um that are making a difference in the kids every single day. I am not saying that I I don't
appreciate everybody in this building and everybody has their job, but the public spoke. This is what we were supposed to do. Uh I really feel that a uh dotto dot comparison of how we got here
needs to happen and um I full I'm fully going to support this item today and um for for the public I'm sorry. I'm very sorry that this happened and make no mistake this board
and I'm just going to say it. Thank you, Scott Travis and the Suns Sentinel and the Chief Auditor for bringing things forward. It may not be pretty. We may not want to hear it, but there is a purpose for journalism in this country
now more than ever. That's all I got. Thanks, >> Dr. Zean. >> Thank you, Chair. Uh, and I want to thank our chair. You know, these um discoveries happen in the course of a large organization like this. Um it is
not uh anything that I want to excuse or to abandon. This is a mistake. U I'm tickled at this motion. Chair uh thank you for bringing this specific one uh that we're discussing because it is an obviously right thing to do. It pales though in comparison to the bigger issue
and we have to own that as well which is we allow people to tell us half of an answer. We allow people to kind of postpone uh the inevitable. we kick the can and we sit back and say that's okay. Uh maybe we don't ask all the questions
we need to, but we do have to think about what our standards have been and make sure that they're 100% about integrity and about honesty and the like. Uh so we'll have some corrections to do, I think, as well, chair, on our own our own accountability on this. Uh
like Miss Rupert, I want to apologize. Um, I'm I'm a big fan, as are many people up here, of OPM, of other people's money, and being very serious about allocating that to the greatest needs. We have strategic goals here, and we don't have enough money that we get when you put it all together with
referendum, with the local, with the legislative money, with donations. We don't have enough to satisfy all the needs that we have. And so, we have to be very, very thoughtful about how we allocate these monies. And I'm hoping that once these investigations are done, chair, uh once the dust settles and
we've stopped the pay, uh once we're uh back to relatively normal operations, I hope that the board does never go back to kind of being uh complacent to some extent or to being overly trusting. Uh but to make sure that on behalf of all
the two million people that live in Broward County that we ask hard questions and demand answers and we demand them in a timely way uh so that we can uh get there. This isn't the first item where we've all of a sudden discovered not everything has been shared with the board. Sometimes that's because, you know, after 4 to 6,000
pages of materials, uh, our eyeballs get tired. Uh, and we really need to have, you know, cogent summaries and all of the critical things presented to us in a way that we can digest them and know exactly what we're doing. Uh but I look forward to moving past this uh when we can chair uh when it makes sense to do
the amends and to and to really implement the accountability measures that we all believe in. Uh but we own some of them, cabinet own, soups own. Uh and and uh that's where we are today. Thanks J. >> Call question. >> Second. >> There's been a call to question by Miss
Alhadev, seconded by Mr. Seiver. All in favor of calling the question say I. >> All oppose say no. >> No. one uh dissenting vote. Um so we're gonna call the question. All in favor of the motion say I.
>> Oh the motion was to end the uh referendum supplements for ESMAB beland D and or above pay band D. So to revert back to the language of 2023. So the ESMAB pay D and below should only be
receiving the referendum supplement. All in favor of that motion say I. >> All oppose say no. Motion passes unanimously. Um [snorts] I would I have one more motion to make. Um I move to direct the superintendent and
general counsel and chief auditor's offices to bring back any contracts for any employees or positions that are above payband D. um to amend them to not
include any referendum supplements. >> Second >> moved by Miss Leonardi, seconded by Miss Rert. Public comment on the motion. >> Madam Chair, if I may. >> Yes, Mr. Sullivan. >> Um if you want to uh maybe consider saying that their pay is aligned to uh
pay D as uh those uh direct reports aren't uh a pay ban. >> Okay. So that well we are we my my motion is not on the direct reports because we already determined that that was >> that's that's how I understood it madam chair is that anybody below your direct
reports that have negotiated contracts um for me um that I have no individuals below me that have negotiated contracts um at all. They are all in a specific pay band within a um employee group or um or pay scale. So I can answer that
question right now. we we besides me I'm the nobody under my um >> so okay thank you for that clarification um Miss Moore [clears throat] >> so I think what John is speaking to is to say something like or salary equivalent because technically the
general counsel people aren't in salary bands >> okay so let me ask the chief auditor before I make that motion or the person standing in today um are you aware of any positions that have negotiated contracts like what we're talking about
that would be above PBND. >> I don't know what the classification on that. I would have to >> Okay. So, I'll >> I would be the only one impacted by that. >> Okay. I'll just I'm gonna amend. So, I'm going to restate my motion um to reflect not the superintendent. Um and I'm
including the chief auditor because we're just I'm not sure what those contracts look like. So, if staff could assist me, um I move to direct the general counsel and
the chief auditor to bring back all uh negotiated contracts with with um employees that are aligned with a payb and above um to bring back so that those employees do not receive a referendum
supplement. Moved by Miss Leonardi, second by Miss Rupert, Dr. Zemen >> above PB band. Yes. Thank you. >> All right. >> That Okay. Uh public comment on the motion. [snorts]
>> Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. I support bringing the contracts back. Um however, the contracts never say referendum. They just say administrative staff and don't specify what is meant by that. So to um the attorney's point, it needs to be
clear so that regardless of what happens in the future, it just doesn't roll. They just don't get it just because you didn't use the right word to restrict it. And just as a reminder related to this, the referendum itself is on the
audit plan. It just needs to get expedited. I don't know where it is in the pipeline because I'm not on the audit committee currently, but when I was the chair, we made sure that it it got put into the audit plan and the last one was audited. Not very well, but it
was at least audited. And that needs to happen again so you can see where the money went. And when you bring back uh ESMA, I'm totally on board with reducing it from 5 and a half% for all the reasons mentioned by the board and speakers.
>> Any other public comment? Dr. Trudy Germanovich. Um I still am going to harp on um most of the public has no idea what you're saying when you're saying pay band D. I don't have any idea what you're saying
when you say pay band D. Please say an amount of money that I know what that means. Thank you. Terry Lopez Price and I'd like to say thank you for all this work that you're doing. Um I would like to also add as an aside um and I will get to the topic
that when I was overpaid as you guys were overpaid I was asked to give back over $5,000 like tomorrow and um that's what happens when they overpay you. So just FYI also in the um various mele of
contracts that we have and I know because our own union represents more than one contract um the language is is like word salad often but if you just keep it straight that referendum is separate from salary this whole
percentage of salary that's in a lot of contracts but referendum came later came separately And in the contracts or in the agreements, any money that goes back goes back to us. So just FYI, I'm pretty
sure that President Fusco will speak on that as well. But there is no adding it back into this budget or working on it and putting it over there or let's see what balances and doesn't balance. No, that's what people tell you. That's what you have to make sure you understand.
It's not the way it is. And this is where your problem starts. So, please know that. Thank you very much for all you do. >> And a fiscal brow teachers union. Um, I need you to double check to make sure where the money the leftover money that
any referendum Broward teachers union hasn't negotiated that any and extra funding gets back to our contracts, all of our members in our contracts. So, you got wrong information again from your staff. And I was texting board members,
ask it out loud to the HR department that sits at the table that negotiates. They will they hopefully will give you the correct answer, but I have my attorneys working on it to get it over to you. So, what I want to say is that I I do need to ask you to double check a
couple of the um executive directors that are in this band because they do actually go out to schools. So again, we want to go strictly to say people that work with our students in our population. You do have some groups in
that band that work with students. So I'm asking you to double check it before you make a solid decision right now. We don't want people harmed that actually have hands-on with students, especially with our ESC department and our education department. >> Any other public comment on the motion?
Board comment on the motion. Miss Hixon. just because um I want to read the language from the the ballot for the referendum so everybody's really clear on what it is. So the ballot language
read, "Shall the shall the school board of Broward County levy an ad valorum property tax of 1 mill annually for fiscal years Janu July 1st, 2023 through through June 30th, 2027 to provide
funding for one, school resource officer, safety staff, and mental health professionals. Two, increasing compensation to recruit and retain teachers and staff. and three essential instruction related expenditures to preserve important programs for all the
benefit for the benefit of all traditional public and charter schools. That's what passed. So I just want to be sure that we understand what all of that says. So it it there was a part on there that said essential instruction related
expenditures to preserve important programs. So, it is actually written in the in the um ballot. Thank you. I got distracted. Um and I
again, I don't know if this is the time. I guess I'll make the motion afterwards about changing some other stuff. So, thank you. >> Uh Miss Bulman. >> Thank you, chair. Um, first of all, I want to commend your leadership on this.
I think that it's uh fantastic that we have this issue pop up over the holidays and that you came with a lot of solutions for us so that we didn't have to get down in the weeds and had a clear direction forward. and I appreciate that
and everybody else who's come here to speak and give their um perspective on this because I think we're uh moving forward in a good direction for something that was an unfortunate um situation. I just to um the point about
the referendum funds going back to the teachers I had a question about this but we called the question. So will that just be contractually put back together based on the the last motion that we the not this motion but
the last one. >> Dr. Hepper, >> what was the last motion? I remember >> so it was uh ending the supplements for sorry. >> Okay. Um I as uh we stated this it's unallocated now if the motion if we vote
and the motion passes. So, it's up to the board to decide to decide where the money goes. >> Is it unallocated or are there is there a contractual obligation to put >> you know what that is? That's a great question. Let me >> let me um >> clarify that. >> Go ahead, Miss Johnson. Yes, that's a great question.
>> The referendum must be spent on what is written in the referendum. So, if we have a surplus, it goes into the fine balance to the board decide to reallocate those resources to the purpose that is written in the referendum. Okay. But that but we might be bound I
guess that's a question um a legal question if we're bound >> because to the point of the speaker if if the contract is that the money if there's extra money that it goes back to the teachers or whoever. >> So that's what I was going to actually >> we need to make sure that that's what's
happening. >> Yes. So that's while you're speaking I was actually thinking the same thing. I think we will have to research the contract uh with BTU to see what's in their contract as it speaks to referendum dollars that are not allocated for mental health safety and
security. Um if there's funds that are unallocated uh for those purposes if it goes straight back to um um BTU. >> So do we need a separate motion for that or is that just a general >> you you have it miss? >> The referendum is allocated based on a formula. So everyone that is hired and
it's written in the referendum is getting paid exactly what's the allocation amount. So there will be some surplus if we're short of staff or so those things are go back into the fund balance till the board decide if they want to reallocate it to mental health or other things or to the teachers
because there's always going to be some surplus because it's depending on the type of staff and the allocation amount of the increase in the referendum overall. So this changed the narrative of the referendum and we need to look at what is the amount left over. We got to
do analysis of the total referendum and then see what purpose if we're lacking in some of the things that was written in the referendum language. Then we can revise the referendum accordingly to the language that is outlined in a referendum because it only could be
spent on the items that's written and passed by the taxpayers to our employees and to what we agreed the referendum should be allocated for that purpose. >> So I guess like at you know within the month or whatever we would know what
we're looking at for available funds and then reallocate Yeah, we could project, but we don't know until we finally close. We could project because we do have expenditures that's going on currently and sometimes we under expense in different classification of the referendum and
that money is held in a fine balance until it's reallocated back out based on the criterias of the referendum or direction of the board. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. >> Any other board discussion on the
motion? All in favor of the motion say I. All oppose say no. Motion passes unanim unanimously. Um my last comment while I have the floor is uh to the individuals who are impacted by this
today. Um I want to echo Miss Hixon's sentiments that we know that you work hard and we see you. And right now in this environment in public education, everyone is called to sacrifice. Our teachers are called to sacrifice every
single day our bus drivers, our cafeteria workers. Um, and we need, especially in Brower County public schools, to show the public that we are transparent and accountable so that they can continue to entrust us with these
funds that have an enormous impact on our students. So, we see you, we thank you. Um, this is not a personal attack on the people who, you know, help run this district. Um, but we really need to to show everyone that we're going to do
right by the people who see our children, our students every single day. Um, Miss Hixon, [snorts] >> this is just on the general item number. >> General item. Yes. So, I um I would like to make a motion to bring back the
referendum pay scale for lack of another term um so that we can look instead of doing percentages doing fixed rates and I'm not sure I asked the superintendent should that come to a workshop to discuss it first and then the board
>> votes on it or >> Yes, I think more appropriately to have a wider discussion is probably bring it to a workshop and then Now we can uh then a vote at the the subsequent meeting. >> So my motion is to bring it to the ne the next board workshop. I think it's
important to get this done now um so that we can can move from percentages to a fixed rate. >> Second. >> Moved by Miss Hixon, seconded by Miss Leonardi. Public comment on the motion. >> If you mind, Madam Chair, I just want to
be clear. You mean next week the 13th workshop or are we talking about uh February 17th? >> No, the 13th. January 13th. >> So, right now for the um we have 7.5 hours um allotted. We can add it. Just
want to make the board aware of the of the uh current time. >> We move things around all the time. Is there something that can be moved to the next to the February? >> Uh it'll be a challenge because we have committee reports, we have student discussions. Um, we have another item
that must come to you guys and then uh budget updates along with a diversity report update >> which is policy driven >> which is also policy driven. >> It it could be added. You have seven and a half hours. I just want to make the board aware we try to schedule within the eight hour period because that's the
time limit that the board has uh set for workshops. >> It could be then it could be February because it needs time. I >> Yeah, it's going to need time. >> It needs time to to be discussed. So trying to shove it in a half hour isn't going to work. >> I believe this needs to be negotiated.
>> Okay. >> Um go ahead. Um Dr. Lozano, thank you talking about. >> Yeah. So it would need is part of negotiations. So we would have to discuss that in closed door would be my recommendation. >> So can we bring it to >> closed door?
>> Absolutely. >> As soon as possible. >> Do we need a motion for that to bring it to closed door? Yeah, we can bring it to closed door. Yes. >> Okay. >> We'll bring it to the next um um closed door. >> Okay. Anything else on the item, Miss Hixon?
>> No. Thank you again for all of your motions. You kind of covered most of the things that I was thinking of. >> Thank you, Dr. Holes, on the item. >> Public? >> No, Madam Chair. I'm good. Thank you. >> Any other board discussion on the item?
All in favor of item one as amended, say I. All oppose say no. >> Item passes unanimously as amended. >> You forgot public comment. >> We did public comment on the item. >> There was no There was no motion. >> There was no motion.
>> It was withdrawn. >> Can I have a motion and a second to move item number two? >> Moved by Dr. Zean, second by Miss Hixon. Public comment on item number two. >> We just have one registered speaker, Dr. N Lynch Walsh. >> Sorry. Um, Madam Chair, I'm sorry. Do
you mind if we take a quick minute recess to allow the um >> Yeah. And and prior to the recess, um I know Dr. Heeper wanted to make some comments. >> Yep. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um um thanks for bringing this item. First of all, I I share the same sentiment as the board. I know it's not going to be
popular amongst many of the administrators under my purview and that that I wholeheartedly support. Um, but I have very firm personal stance when it comes to referendum dollars. Um, I've worked in a couple of districts and um, referendum is for the folks who are
closest to our students. Um, frontline workers, bus drivers, custodians, PO service workers who are doing the hard work day in and day out. Um, I'm looking forward to the auditor to help um, discover the truth of uh, how the item came. But I I want to lend my support to
the referendum dollars going directly to the people that it supports. I also look forward to the closed door discussion and um eventual public discussion about restructuring the referendum. Um there are some things that I personally believe uh as it should be restructured.
So, I know we're going to have robust conversation about that. That's going to make sure we are using these these uh dollars appropriately based on the um actual eventual voters of Broward County and its intended use. I'm looking forward to that discussion wholeheartedly uh support the board
sentiment and also public sentiment of how this these funds should be used and and I'm looking forward to how we actually got here too. So, I just want to lend my two cents on the comment. And I know it's not popular amongst uh many other people that I might support, but that's my personal stance on it and that's my uh uh support on this issue as
a superintendent moving forward as well. Thank you. >> Thank you. We'll now take a brief two-minute recess. Mhm. Heat. Heat. N. down. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Hey.
Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] >> Let's get >> [music] >> King I'm Heat. Heat. >> [music]
>> Hey. Hey. Hey. >> [music] >> Down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down >> [music]
[music] >> What are you doing? Hey, hey, hey. Hey dad. Hey, I'm >> [music] >> down. Everybody
All right, welcome back to the special school board meeting. We have item two on the floor. Item two is a general counsel agreement. Um, item two is on the floor. Do we have public comment on item number two? Go ahead.
>> Go ahead. Oh, okay. I was just waiting for them to call me. Um, Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. Um, so if item number two is still the general counsel, I'm actually thinking probably no. This is probably not the right time
to be trying to bring in someone new. Um, and this could all fall apart and you guys have a lot to cover today. Uh, you already have someone available for interim. Um, I have the negotiation summary table. I would have been in favor of letting her do it remotely for the first
few months because that makes sense. everybody can see if they have buyer's remorse um or not. Um but part of the negotiation and how Scott Travis uncovered the whole no chiefs left behind is that it that it was shared
that everybody but the board twice was shared during negotiations. Everybody but the board was getting the referendum dollars. That's how this all started. So now she would not be getting that. and if she's not okay with that, you don't have a contract. So, it'll be very interesting to see how
this pans out. And if everybody agrees to move forward, a concession could be letting her be remote. Um, ever since COVID, we found that we could all be very effective remote in a remote setting. Um, I think the reason was so her daughter could finish school for the
school year. as a parent, I would think any parent could understand not wanting to uproot their child or be away from their child. Um, especially when we have the technology to do it. So, um, that was one of the sticking points. And there, of course, some other things. Um, it's smacked of we want a lot of money.
Uh, and again, I don't think this is the right time. So, no, I'm not in favor of hiring them. Um, but if you do move forward, uh, remote would be better. And then no harm, no foul if everyone decides that this really is the upside down because 2026 we're killing Vecna.
We're gonna blow up the upside down and we're going to get rid of VCNA's planet and it'll all be over and we live happily ever after. We're not doing this in 26 again. We've had way way too much upside down of late. So if that's what she wants to walk into, um I guess we
can't stop her or you can. But um this is not the time to be walking into this district. This is an interim period when you need rehab and you need to strip it down. Actually, not even to the studs. You're in a raise or replace or
renovate. You can't renovate your way out of this. You just have to raise the whole place and build it from scratch. You don't have internally what you need for that. So, if I were her, I would not try to walk into this place now. But, let's see what happens. [laughter] Thank you. >> That concludes our registered speakers.
>> Thank you. Um, I also brought this item and I want to thank Miss Dupri Bruno and her council for being here today as well as Mr. Harvey for representing us um, for many years now in these negotiations. Um, it's been a pleasure to work with
you over the years. Um, so just for the board's convenience, I know that there's uh, minutes online. Um, but I kind of wanted to summarize uh, the negotiations and and my thinking. Um and then I welcome uh my colleagues. So as uh the
minute stated um Mr. Dupri Bruno came in with a few asks. Um one was a 5% contribution to an investment account valued anywhere between 10 to $15,000 a year. Um she requested a transition period of remote work for several
months, a super majority vote. um full benefits for everyone in the family valued at around $49,000 and for us to pay attorneys fees. Um our counter uh because of all of those uh benefits was
a salary range of 215 to 240. Um when we came back and negotiated a second day, Miss Dupree Bruno conceded on the transition period of remote work and agreed to agreed to a later start date. Um uh my position on that was that
I did not feel that the board uh wanted a a general counsel who was not in the office full-time right right from the beginning especially walking into a new office. Um she conceded on the supermajority piece. My position was that the board has never supported a
supermajority piece um in in any of our direct report contracts. Um and then she conceded on some benefit of the health health insurance benefits saving the district around $33,000. Um our counter then was to move the
salary range up to $250,000 with no investment account and uh no investment account contribution. Um her team came back with an ask of $280,000. We countered with $ 260. Um and they
came back with 265 and we maintained at 260. And the position and you know this is all this was a public meeting. The position of of her team was that she wanted to start um making the same amount of money as the current general counsel. Our position is we wanted her
to have room to grow. Um and that you know our current general counsel had been in the district for several decades. Um had a conference room named after her. Um, and I'm very pleased to put forward the agreement um, that we came to today. Um, I don't know if Miss
uh, Dupri Bruno or her council want to make any comments before we go to board comments. >> Yes, please. Uh, we would. And good morning or good afternoon everyone. My name is Sarah Liss with Acre. I have the uh, honor of representing Ms. Dupi Bruno. And I know the board is aware of
her credentials then that's why she was the top candidate for this uh, position. But for the sake of the public and transparency, I would like to take a couple minutes to go over her her substantial credentials and her background. Um, she's been practicing law for nearly 30 years and is one of
only 47 board certified education law specialists in Florida. Uh, for the last almost six years, she's been serving as the general counsel for Lee County, and she's excelled there. uh the seven member board to which she reports has given her a rating of highly effective
the last three years and she received a nearly perfect score on her last evaluation. Um in approaching these negotiations, we we came to the table with three main considerations. First, the market value for this position. Second, her
substantial credentials and experience which I'm getting into. And third, the risks and challenges uh that this position uh brings to the table. And I don't think anyone here would would question that those exist. Um Mrs. Dupi Bruno also brings a lot to the table in
addition to her expertise in managing complex legal and regulatory matters for Lee County, which is the eighth largest school district in the state and the 28th largest in the country. She's a proven leader. Um, she's a fellow in the Florida Bar Leadership Academy and has
been a presenter on education law at the state and national level. Uh, she's also knows how to lead a legal team, which is important. You don't just want an incredible legal technician, which she is. You also want a leader, and you want someone who can navigate the unique,
challenging, and high profofile issues facing the Broward County School District right now. In terms of prior leadership experience, it's worth noting that before taking her current position, she built a private law practice from the ground up. She and her partner managed a staff of four to five people
for many years. And prior to that, she worked at an even larger law firm. Uh she also used to be a circuit civil and family law medi mediator, a Florida Supreme Court qualified arbitrator, and a trained collaborative attorney, which many of you may be wondering what that
is. That's a a fundamental paradigm shift in how one approaches solving disputes from adversarial to collaborative. And she uses these soft skills every day uh to be an effective
leader and a legal technician. Uh she certainly looks forward to the opportunity to advancing the district's objectives and protecting its interests. And madame board chair was a strong negotiator and as stated was successful ina in obtaining some concessions from
uh ms dewi Bruno for example her her starting salary would be lower than ms batista's current salary and our opinion is that her starting salary is also a little less than what the market would support. Um, and in the interest of fairness and enabling the board to be
good stewards of taxpayer dollars, uh, she didn't ask for up to 20 weeks severance, um, in the event of disability, which is something that was in Ms. Batista's contract, and she didn't ask for uh, the opportunity to earn severance until 6 months into her
contract. Other than than those concessions, her contract mainly mirrors Ms. Batista's contract. Um she did ask that um the district credit her six years of service with Lee County in accordance with an existing board
policy. Um there seems no question to us that that's given there's an existing policy that this is is standard practice. Um she also asked to receive the same relocation expense provision as a superintendent. Um you know Miss Dwi Bruno would be re
relocating herself and her family um from Lee County to Broward County. Um, and it's important for everyone in this room and everyone listening to know that this is not a blank check that she receives uh to spend how she wishes. No, she pays the money up front and then she
has to submit receipts and only those expenses and up to $15,000 covered by the Internal Revenue Code would be reimbursed. Uh this is standard language for a government uh employment agreement and as additional evidence of
the board being good stewards of the district's money. The language in her contract is actually more restrictive um on this piece than what's set forth in the superintendent's contract. So with all that being said, we look forward to a fruitful discussion and to answering
any questions. >> Thank you, Miss Hixon. >> Thank you. And thank you and and welcome Miss Dubris. It's nice to see you again. Um and we look forward to to a long time together. This is kind of the
uncomfortable part and then after that we can move forward. I just had basically a a couple of questions and some concerns. So, can you explain why
why not until June 1st of 2026? >> Thank you, Miss Hixon. I I I do have a middle schooler that I would like to make sure that she's able to finish school in her current school so that there's the least amount of disruption as possible. Um we did offer the um
possibility of trying to do virtual so I can be super mom and be and Lee and here at the same time um but that was not something that um um per discussion would be um advantageous to the board. So I would like June 1st as the
deadline. However, the contract also says that I can give two weeks notice and just advise the board that I will be starting earlier. My intention would be to start earlier, but at this point I still have some logistics to um figure out and then at that point I'll be able
to to come in. >> Okay. Thank you. That's fair. Um and and I do have some concerns with the 260 just because I know you're comparing it to Miss Batista's salary, but she's been here for a long time and when Miss
Batista started it was at 248. So, I would like to see what my colleagues have to say, but I think 250 255 um is I would be more comfortable with. But I think based on the conversation that we had, I would I don't know if now
it's time to make a motion, but a motion to change the language about the 5.5% because we just made a motion. So, we have to we have to change the contract that's before us because we just took that 5.5 referendum part out of it. So,
I'm not sure um Miss Maya if you could guide us on on what to do, but I think that's important to address. >> Well, today um representing us is Mr. uh >> Mr. Harvey. Sorry. And and I can probably get out in front of this issue.
So, Miss Dupri Bruno um never asked for the referend referendum money to be included in her contract. She didn't know about it until it was brought up during uh our negotiation sessions. She's heard the board. She's heard from the public. um she has no interest in
receiving any part of the referendum money. So we are open to um whatever language the uh Mr. Harvey and and the board proposes to eliminate any question uh on that issue. >> So should I make a motion to remove that language from the contract?
>> Uh through the chair. Uh may I? Yes. I I have some suggested language that I would like to share with the board if it's okay. >> Go right ahead. >> Yes. Through the chair. uh uh for 7A uh at the bottom on page 25 where it
references compensation says during each year of the term of this agreement, the general counsel's compensation shall be increased by the percentage of salary increase or other compensation increases provided to other 12-month administrative employees of the
board in salary band E or above within the equivalent salary range amount thereof. is that >> I I have a separate suggestion. I think if we just put in what's in here already
and just say um not the refer like be clear in the language that dis disccluding referendum money because I don't think any of us have a problem with if everyone gets a 2% pay raise and
all of that that's supposed to be in there. The issue is is clearly just the referendum money. So my motion would be um about adding in here that it would exclude referendum money.
Yes, through the chair. Um if if I may, the only problem is that there needs to be a reference to the increases that would occur if there's a 2% increase for administrative employees that there needs to be a reference that uh that she would get that increase. Yes. So it says
here during each so we're on 7A. During each year of the term of this agreement, the general council's compensation shall be increased by the percentage of salary increase or other compensation increases provided to other 12-month administrative employees of the board. I
would put comma excluding referendum >> girl. >> So it doesn't change anything else except for that she's not getting the referendum money. Um Mr. Lozano. Dr. Lozano >> through the chair. Dr. Lozano, chief human resources officer. I just want to
point out um 12 month administrative employees sit in TSP, sit in ESMAP, sit in we have 12 month administrative employees in multiple groups. >> Change them to say excluding referendum
money. though. So I make a motion to change the language in the contract where um it talks about increase by the percentage of salary increases or other compensation increases provided to other 12-month
administrative employees. Can you say that again? above band >> in salary band E or above or within the equivalent salary range amount thereof excluding referendum >> uh supplements >> that language. Thank you so much. That's
my motion. >> Second moved by Miss Hixon, seconded by Miss Leonardi. Public comment on the motion. >> Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. Um, yes, please accept the sage advice of the seasoned board attorney
because he's trying to fix what is wrong with your current attorney's contracts and that language would do it. Um, the language that he's proposed and I support uh the motion based on his wording. Thank you.
>> Board discussion on the motion. >> All in favor of the motion say I. >> Any oppose say no. Motion passes unanimously. Could we get any clarification on salary band E and above? I think Ms. Dwei Bruno
had some questions on what titles or level of employees fall within that. So we have 14 employees in salary band E and those are our executive directors and that range band for those employees
is an annual salary minimum of 104,836 to a maximum of 189,212. >> Thank you. >> [snorts] >> I didn't make a motion to change the salary, but I would like to hear my um
colleagues thoughts. Um and I just want to briefly respond since I did the negotiations to the salary piece. Miss Dupri Bruno made significant concessions especially as it relates to health insurance and it was my position um in
the discussions that we're having as a district as a whole. Uh it was my position that Miss Dri Bruno Bruno should have the same um health insurance benefits as our our you know our other employees. Um that is not what Miss
Batista had. So, Miss Batista uh was h her health insurance cost about $49,000 if not maybe a little bit less. Um but that was a significant concession that um Mr. Depri Bruno made which is why I
felt comfortable going up to the 260 which is still less than what Miss Batista made. Miss Thompson, [snorts] >> thank you chair. Um and I want to thank you for your negotiation on this and Mr. Harvey. I just wanted to make one comment before I make other comments. I
was a little disappointed about all the negative comments towards our district during the negotiation. I also feel like Miss the candidate knew that we're the sixth largest district in the nation coming into it and it was extremely disheartening to hear it. And Mr.
Harvey, I want to thank you for kind of stepping in there and pointing that out. Um I my comments on the supplement were already taken care of or the referendum dollars. I think the preference for the earlier start date. However, I
understand the moving. Uh I also do not agree with the evaluation preference listed in the contract um where we have to come to her before we make any public comment about her performance. If you
look in the table, it's under performance evaluations. Um, and I just think there are some times on the deis where things will come up that we need to make comments on [snorts] and to be restricted on what we
are able to say as elected officials and is inappropriate in my opinion. Um, I would agree with Miss Hixon, Mrs. picks in on the lower salary band. Miss Batista earned the amount of money that
she made by dedicating herself to our district over decades. Um and those are my comments for right now. Thank you. And um I I want to provide some clarity around the discussion around um the the evaluation piece. Originally the
language was shall um but it was changed to may. I think that uh so it's not requiring the board members to speak to her beforehand. Um but you know I I think that all of us can agree that like a personal conversation with someone if there's an issue is appropriate as you
stated. Um things do come up and you know we all have first amendment rights as board members. So that's why the language language was changed. Dr. Zean [snorts] >> chair thank you again for uh u all the extra work on this. Um, I was able to watch uh the video of the ceremonies and
then read the transcript and then think a lot about this. And I really believe, you know, on behalf of Broward County that this negotiation was done very well and then on top of that for u and and by the way, let me just start by doing the right thing. How would you
like to be addressed, ma'am? >> Mr. Depri Bruno is fine. Thank you. or attorney. >> Okay. Either miss or say attorney Dri Bruno Bruno. >> Dupri Bruno. Thank you very much. Uh I appreciate that. Um but for you and your council to walk in here and walk away
from 5 and a half% as a very first thing is a classy move. Thank you. Uh that is an issue that's as you saw this morning uh full of of appropriate uh angst. And for you to walk up here and and just throw that back and to be honest with us
that you didn't expect it. So, um it's it's good to bring it back. Um I expect that from a lawyer anyway. You know, by statute, you must be honest with us all the time. Um but it is great uh to do that. I like a couple other people who have talked already are concerned about your start date. I'd like you here
tomorrow. Uh you know, 60 days is contract. I get that. And uh I love your commitment to your family and and the idea of disruption. Um I like where the contract is, so I'm not going to make a motion formally about that. I just wanted to express my preferences uh that you said
maybe after March 7th you could show up. Um I would prefer you to do that as soon as possible. We'd love to have you. Um and uh I was even going to make some kind of suggestion to the board that what if you did 4 days a week here and and could start earlier. Uh we really
need a long-term general counsel and the faster you start uh I think the better it is for Broward County Schools. I want to get back to the salary issue though that came up. Um, your attorney suggested that this is, I think you said, ma'am, uh, below market, what the
market supports. I wrote down what you said, I think. Um, and I'm curious about what evidence you have of what the market supports for somebody with 28 years of legal experience and miss Bruno's uh, background. Uh, what does
the market and what is the evidence that you have for that? So, of course, we looked at the existing uh or the former general counsel's contract, including where she started three years ago and where she's at now. Uh, but we also took a look at what's going on in Orange County, which is a
smaller school district than than Broward, and their current GC is making more than what Ms. Dwee Bruno has agreed as her starting salary. So, those are the two main data points that we looked at. Um, I'm sure Miss Dewi Bruno may have more um in her mind just based on
her significant experience in this area, but those are the main points we considered. >> Terrific. And I appreciate the choice of Orange. Their general counsel is one of the nation's best general counsels. Uh the fact that he's compensated very well may be a reflection of his amazing stature and and he's in short supply for
helping, you know, all kinds of districts. Uh it's not uncommon for people to call uh in a pinch and say, "Oh my god, I don't know what to do." uh and he's that kind of of GC. Um I appreciate your thoughts about uh the market. Um and then lastly, the
evaluation preference was a sticking point with me, but I'm glad that it went from shall um I will live by that uh just personally, you know, it's better to talk directly uh about issues that have come up. There are times, however, though to Miss Thompson's point where there will be things that we don't like
and we have every right to say it on the board. this contract I think chair in no way prevents us uh as board members using our first amendment rights to say something that we think could have gone uh better and I hope we also use that first amendment right to say the things that gone well it's too often we point
out failures and forget to point out successes um but I think this contract is a tremendous first step for you as the general counsel of Broward County I appreciate you uh being so flexible with our chair in the negotiations uh when
you gave up the the medical plan that our current general counsel had. That's a significant amount of money uh that you may have to pay if you really want to uh cover your entire family. Um but uh I like this contract. I wouldn't change a word and I'm a tough guy on
contracts. Uh um but I just feel like we landed in a great place and this is a great reflection of of what you're going to bring to Broward County and I would just like that reflection to be here uh as soon as possible. I almost wanted to call Lee County and see if they would wave your 60-day rule, but that's inappropriate for me to do that. Uh, but
I will express my preferences and I really uh look forward to working with you and thank you again for uh you know finding a place where you can come here um at a pay level, at a benefit level, at you know things like severance and evaluations in a way that fits very uh I
think consistently with the culture of Broward County. >> Thank you, Miss Rupert. Hi, it's nice to see you again. Um, I'm I'm supportive of this contract. I did have one question and it kind of hits on the part of the conversation
that we had in the last item. Um, on page nine of this agreement um, under section I FRS classification. Um, I've never seen uh this this job or the you know set as
like this general counsel as senior management service class um for the term of the employment agreement in any renewal. Is that something I've never seen it called that? Um so I'm wondering is that still in the pay band and how
does that work together? >> Dr. Lozano or Mr. Harvey. Mr. Harvey. >> Uh, yes. Through the chair, I'll I'll allow Dr. Lozano to address this, but I if I understand it correctly, many many
general counsels h fit into that category. Uh there's certain statutory requirements that the school board has to go through in order to designate employees as senior uh management. And uh I believe the district has done that for this position.
which I think he could he could verify that, but it's it's done for several districts throughout the state of Florida. >> Right. Well, I I understand general counsel as senior management, but just the part where it said service class, I had never seen that written before, so
it caused um caused a question. Nothing bad. I was like, "Hey, we just finished talking about salaries and and categories. Uh may as well ask about this." Yeah, that's just the standard title for senior management service class. So, that's just part of that
title. >> Okay, got it. Um, I will support this item and I look forward to uh hopefully um welcoming you you into Broward County at the end of this meeting, but also um
when you actually come over from the from the West Coast. So, um that's all. Thank you. >> Thank you, Dr. Holes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, so I just want to welcome again uh Mrs. uh Depri
uh Bruno. Thank you so much for coming to Broward. Um I do support uh the the salary listed here. Um uh in fact uh it appears to be similar to market rate or
probably even less. Um when I look at the contract uh I think the overall package is actually uh financially much less than Miss Batista. So I would not support decrease in the salary at all. I think it's similar to market rate or
even less. And um I am in supportive of the 260. Um the fringe benefits is slightly less than uh Miss Batista and um and also the the the health coverage um is significantly less. So I think
this is um a reasonable uh contract and I am uh fully supportive of it and certainly not supportive of any reduction in the salary that's indicated here. Uh thank you Madam Chair. >> Thank you Miss Bulman. >> Thank you Madam Chair and welcome. It's
great to see you um again and thank you for accepting this position. I think um you know this is such a huge job and so uh I agree with what has been negotiated in this contract. I'm very grateful that
you're willing to take this on. Um and you know I appreciate that you went through some of your uh accolades and experience because I think it just reinforces the level of experience and expertise that we're getting at a time
when we really need it. So I so welcome and thank you. Um the only question that I had about this was the uh you know we we do an annual evaluation of our general counsel and then there's an interim evaluation. Is that something that we were doing with Miss
>> Matis? That is not that was a a proposal by Miss Bruno. >> All right. So okay I was just wondering if that was something else. So we'll um So would that be on the same evaluation tool that we use on the annual basis or would this be more informal?
>> I believe that well I don't know if Mr. Mr. Harvey or Miss D. >> Uh yes to the chair. Uh this was an idea that was proposed by uh Miss Dupo Bruno. I I can represent to the board that the way this
would work is that there would be an interim instrument and an annual instrument that would be developed jointly with the board and and the and the general counsel within uh at actually at the same time uh within three months. So that was an idea that
she had proposed and uh you know we didn't have any objections to it but I don't know if she would want to address it herself as well. >> If I may through the chair um you'll see one thing in this contract is communication is very important. So my
goal is to service this board with excellence. Um to make sure the office of general counsel is servicing the administration with excellence. And the only way for me to be able to do that is really to have communication, have conversations. We have two points to do that. One will be an interim. I have the
same setup in Lee County. And that interim evaluation is much shorter. It's very general. It's not rated. It's just so I have an idea as to what's working, what's not working. Um, so we can move forward in a very positive direction. And then of course you have the annual evaluation.
>> I mean, I appreciate that immensely. think that's a great idea and I think it'll be very helpful for everybody and communication is key. So, and you know, to the point that's been made a couple times about your start date, um, obviously we would like you to be here
as soon as possible, but this is a big move and I think that we need to appreciate the fact that we have an excellent person coming and so, uh, I think we'll be rewarded for our patience for that as you kind of get all of your affairs in order to cross the alligator
alley. So, welcome and thank you very much. >> Thank you, Miss Bullwin. Thank you, Mr. Seivera. >> I also uh want to extend a warm welcome to um our hopefully future council. Uh certainly understand the need to allow
your is I apologize. Is it your son or your daughter that's in middle school? >> A daughter. >> The daughter to to finish up middle school. Uh I think I share the same sentiment as my colleagues that we'd love to see you uh here as quickly as possible, but uh as a father of of three young children, I I I certainly
understand. Um [clears throat] chair, I I had a a comment and a question to I guess Mr. Harvey as as our as our counsel who's representing us in this uh particular u situation. Um in regards to paragraph 11, there's an indemnification
provision. Um I'm wondering sir, would it be appropriate or is it possible uh in the employment law space to uh include a carveout for exceptions of instances of gross negligence and or willful misconduct when you are talking
about indemnification um uh provision in the employment law space. Um I in my professional practice litigate these things from time to time and uh I am a big proponent of those types of carveouts and I was just wondering if it's an appropriate uh in the in the
employment law space for that to happen. >> Uh yes through the chair. Um, yes, the board should not indemnify any uh employee based on if if there's any gross negligence. Uh, I'm not sure if Mu Bruno would have any
objections to adding language like that to the agreement, but >> I think we would need to caucus um on this and any other major changes that we're talking about today. So that would that would certainly be my
recommendation that um that paragraph specifically the indemnification provision of paragraph 11 be be considered and and um in no way shape or form am I suggesting that you're going to commit gross negligence or willful misconduct but um certainly the the the litigators in the room can appreciate
the need to address it at this stage of litigation as opposed to uh months or years down uh down the road. So, uh, uh, chair, I I would ask that that be something that be brought back to the, u proverbial table, uh, if you will, and just for the benefit of of my colleagues
and the public's understanding of where I am from this, while I understand the need to indemnify, um, a general counsel for certain situations, if in fact um, she were to do something silly um, and, you know, outside of the scope or or
something that exposed the district to substantial liability outside the parameters of which she should be doing as our general counsel. Uh I don't believe that we would uh should be responsible for indemnifying her for that. And again, I'm not suggesting that um uh our future council is going to do
that. I just um trying to cut this issue off at this stage of the litigation. Also, chair, if I may, uh, piggybacking on Miss Thompson's, um, point that she brought up in regard to the professional feedback and evaluation section,
specifically paragraph nine. I believe it's the one two the third sentence of the first paragraph of paragraph nine which states and I quote if the board members individually have criticisms or
complaints about the performance of the general counsel the board member may discuss criticisms or complaints with Miss Dri Bruno Bruno personally before referencing any criticisms and complaints um in her evaluation or in a
public um meeting. Um, I have um I have issues um with that. Um it the way I read it is is a may council stop me if I'm wrong. It doesn't unless I'm reading this incorrectly. This is a may so it's
not a mandate. Um however, I would um certainly echo Miss Thompson's concerns about any elected official sitting up on the on the dis not being able to speak freely whether or not they went and spoke to the general counsel. uh first or not. If something comes to mind or
you feel the need uh in your capacity as a sitting board member to say something, I I don't believe you should have to go um and talk to to to somebody. Um so with that, those are all my comments for now. Chair, thank you. >> Would you like to make a motion? Any motions since you
>> uh on the indemnification? Yes. Thank you. See, I got carried away with the uh with the with the negative stuff. Let's go back to I I would move chair that paragraph Let me get my numbers right for the record. It's 11. No. Paragraph 11. The
identification provision include uh a carveout specifically um excluding acts of gross negligence and or willful misconduct. >> Second. >> Moved by Mr. Sea, seconded by Miss Thompson. Public comment on the motion.
[snorts] >> Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. I support the motion of course. And it then begs the question, was this absent from Miss Batista's contract? It would explain a lot. Um, however, having said that, um, this of course is not to
suggest that the new general counsel would be doing any of this. This is a wise decision because it puts uh internal controls and enterprise risk management. It is um consistent with those concepts. It protects the board
from individual acts. this should be in everybody's contract. So that would be the next thing to look for. Um but this is in the spirit of continuous improvement. I totally support the motion and I hope that it will be acceptable to um Mr. Pu Bruno.
>> Any other public comment on the motion or discussion on the motion? >> Um I believe we need to take a brief recess. So, or I guess would would Mr. Dup preo and her council like to caucus. >> Um, I don't know if there's any other
comments or anything that um, anyone else wants to say. Madam Chair, >> Miss Alhadv just raised her hand. So, go ahead, Mrs. Aladd. >> Well, no, I just have a I'm going to have a motion. So, >> okay. So, do you I mean I I think the appropriate thing is to caucus on this
issue on this motion right now since we have a motion on the floor. Mr. her. >> Do we need to recess to caucus? [snorts] >> We would like to caucus, please. >> Okay, we'll take a brief recess.
Hey >> [music] [music] >> Down. [music] [music] Down go. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music]
[music] >> Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Yeah. Oh, I see. Yeah. Wo. Yeah. Woah. Yeah. >> [music]
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. I feel you. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music]
>> Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Everybody. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Heat. Heat. N. >> [music] >> Keeping
it. I wanted [music] Okay. [music] Doing Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey.
down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down down. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey everybody. Hey,
hey, hey. Data dump. >> [music] >> Wonder. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat.
[music] Think we are Thank you. We are uh back after caucusing. Um I believe there is some con some language that that would like to be proposed. >> Uh yes, through the chair.
Uh consistent with the motion that was uh made by the board, uh we'd like to propose the following language. Uh so in it at the end of paragraph 11 we would like to say notwithstanding the
foregoing the board shall not be obligated to indemnify Dupe Bruno for any claims losses or damages that are solely and directly caused by Dupe Bruno's gross negligent
or willful misconduct in accordance with Florida statutes 10126 and 111. 07 [snorts] >> 1012.26 which governs uh all educational employees,
instructional employees I'm sorry and uh 111.07 which governs government employees. So the motion would need to be amended or a substitute. I'll make a substitute motion uh to include that language
>> moved by Miss Leonardi, seconded by Miss Thompson. Public comment on the substitute motion >> or discussion on the substitute motion. >> Madam Chair, >> yes, Dr. Holes. >> Yes. Can you repeat the motion as it's amended, please?
>> Mr. Harvey. >> Yes. Through the chair. Uh notwithstanding the foregoing, the board shall not be obligated to indemnify Dupe Bruno for any claims, losses, or damages
that are solely and directly caused by Dupe Bruno's gross negligence or willful misconduct in accordance with Florida statutes section 101226 and 111.07. Madam Chair, I'm not sure if anyone was ahead of me, but I'd like to speak on
it. >> Say that a little bit slower, please. >> At the appropriate time >> on the the substitute motion. >> Yes. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Okay. Um, Madame Chair, I just wanted to confirm that Miss Dri Bruno is um what
is her take on the on the motion? >> Through the chair. Thank you. We had an opportunity to discuss this particular language and I'm comfortable with it because it references um both statutes that are applicable 1012.26 and 111.07
with regards to government employees including attorneys both in the education setting and just in general for government employees. So I'm comfortable with that language. It it it mirrors what is uh specifically in those statutes. >> Uh thank you, Madam Chair. I'm I'm done
for my questions. >> Any other board discussion on the substitute motion? All in favor of the substitute motion say I. >> I. >> All post say no. >> Substitute M po motion passes unanimously. We're back to uh the item.
I have Mrs. or Mr. Ser, are you done? >> Go ahead, Mrs. Aladaf. >> Yes. So I would like to speak to on page seven. I'd like to make a motion. I move that relocation or moving expenses not to exceed $15,000 be subject to repayment
if the employee voluntarily separates or is terminated for cause within one year of the start date with repayment terms clearly defined in the employment contract. >> Moved by Mrs. Aladev, seconded by Miss Thompson.
Public comment on the motion. >> Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. I would only be in support of this if this is what everybody else has gotten because there are other direct reports that you paid relocation expenses to and were they subject to
having to be here for a year because if you're here and you're making her uproot yourself wouldn't even do the transition period then a year is long enough that you uprooted and now you have to rroot yourself re-uproot yourself if you then leave even in a year. It's one thing to
leave in two, three weeks, which again is why you could have had the three-month transition period. It's another thing to be here for a year and then you have to pay it back. But anyway, if it's if everyone else is getting the same deal, then that would be fair and equitable. If this is a new
thing, I'm all for saving money. But did you just do contracts with other people where you didn't put that stipulation in? Just asking. Thank you. >> Any other public comment on the motion? Board member comment on the motion.
>> Madam chair, I'm in the queue. Please >> go ahead, Dr. Holes. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. So, um uh I would like to ask if this has ever been included for any um lateral position uh with
anyone we've hired before. >> Dr. Pepper. >> Can you uh specify the question again? Is uh about moving? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> It's about the current motion by board member Al-Hidef regarding paying back moving expense if Miss Dri Bruno is here
for less than one year. Uh based on that motion, has there been any lateral position whereby something similar was included uh for those we hired before? >> Uh excuse me, speaking for myself and my
contract, um the answer is no, but I'll ask Mr. Lozano or Dr. Lozano if there's any other previous direct reports that contracts that have that in there. >> Not that I'm aware of, but we can follow up. Okay. So, Madame Chair, I am not in
support of this motion. Um, I and I would certainly like for Mr. Dr. Lozano to provide that information as soon as possible. uh but if this has not been done with any employee of of uh similar um statue
um I don't uh believe it would be a reasonable ask uh for Miss Dri Bruno Bruno uh I know for her to decide to move to Broward and to take this position that in itself is a very significant um uh move on her part to
take such an action. Um I believe the intent is pure to try to be here uh in Broward County and um be a part of our team. Um there are circumstances that may be out of one's control to which
they uh may have to make um changes in whatever decisions they've made. Uh I just don't believe this is a reasonable ask. I am sure she intends to be here longer, but at the same time, if there are extenduating circumstances that uh result in her not being able to
continue for whatever reason or another, I I I just don't feel this is a reasonable ask, especially if it has not been done before. So, I am not supportive of it. Um I I think that uh then moving expenses up to 15,000, it
probably will be less. Um uh so I think it's it's a fair um it's a fair ask and you know as I mentioned before um the the uh contract is when you look at it um comprehensively it's significantly
less than our prior general counsel in terms of the healthc care expense uh the fringe benefits and so on. Um, so having uh supporting the moving of Miss Bruno to Broward uh and and cover Brendo's
expense, I think is reasonable and I believe it would be unreasonable to ask for that to be paid back should she have to leave the district in a year. So I'm not supportive of it. >> Thank you, Dr. Zean. >> Thanks, Chair. I just wanted to get um just a rehearing and I apologize to Miss
Aldf on this, but this would be in the event that we pay moving expenses and she resigns or >> right she she voluntarily separates with the district or she's terminated for cause.
[snorts] So I I would find it like professionally difficult if if a candidate agreed and got moving money and left on their own within a year. I would say give us the moving money back. But not so much the second case. So I wouldn't vote for this
together. I would certainly vote for it if she came under the pretext she really love this job and Broward's great and all that and then just decided to take a job in, you know, Detroit uh within a year. that that would be, you know, kind of a a primmaaccia evidence that they they weren't as committed as they
thought they were or as they uh were pretending to be, but uh not if we do it for cause. So, I'm just wanted to share kind of I feel strongly about her her saying I don't want to work here anymore and she should pay back the moving expenses, but not so much if we remove her for cost.
>> Miss Thompson, >> um I'm in favor of the motion. I also we didn't have to give the superintendent moving experience expenses cuz he didn't move here [snorts] so that wasn't an issue. And then we also have the chief auditor's contract that is going to be coming up and I think this is a smart
thing to put into all contracts going forward. I think as our morning conversation happened, we are finding different issues and different structures and it's important to start making moves now and and correcting things as we go and not
necessarily always looking back. So, I'm in favor of the motion and um when the chief auditor's contract comes up once that process starts to add this as well. Thank you. >> All right. Um, Miss Dupree Bruno and her council, do you need to caucus?
>> Yes. >> I know. Sorry. Yes. Okay. Before you do that, we have one more um one more board member who wants to comment on the motion. Mr. Sea, >> thank you. Uh, I support the motion. Uh, I think it's a good one. I think this is
one of these things that we hope does not ever come to fruition because we would obviously not want to see you leave within the uh in the first year. So hopefully at the end of the day and when we're sitting back in in 2027 um this will all be for not. However, I
I do understand the need and the desire to have it now. Um I would also like to if I may chair just just comment on on some of the suggestions about things that have been done in the past and does anybody else have this and what have we always done in Broward County? Uh clearly if anybody was paying attention
this morning uh they would have realized that maybe the things that we've been doing in the past aren't the best practices. So this idea that we have to always follow suit for everything that we've done a year ago, two years ago, 3 years ago, two weeks ago, don't think should be uh leading the conversation
any stretch of the imagination. I think we need to be innovative. Uh we need to be bold in some of these decisions that we make moving forward. And every contract is is unique, right? It meets a certain um skill set. It meets a certain employee or a certain individual. So
this idea that everybody's contracts have to be the same is um respectfully a little bit absurd. Um so with that motion, I would um support the motion and look forward to voting on it. >> Any other board comment? All right, we'll recess the meeting so uh Mr. Pri
Bruno Bruno and her council can caucus. Hey. Hey. Hey. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Hey. Hey. Hey. Down. [music] Down.
All right, we are back. Do we have a response from Miss? >> Yes, we Yes, we do have a response, but we also have a request. if if we could get through any of the other um alterations that are going to be made so we can come back to you with a comprehensive response as to whether
we're good to go or not, I think that would help move things along. >> Okay. Um we need to vote on this motion. Um, so or I don't know, Miss Moore, if there's a a way to do this where we
um don't vote on the motion and we have have all the motions come forward or so they can caucus on everything comprehensively. >> I mean, I believe parliamentarily you have to dispose of the motion on the floor before taking up other motions. So
that's kind of why the cadence has gone the way it has. Um, so do you have a response to this particular >> Yes. Yes, we do. Um, so in a further showing of good faith because remember Ms. Dwee Bruno did not even ask for an
entitlement to severance for the first six months of her employment here. That was something she never asked for. Um, she came to the table with that as a showing of good faith. Um, so the the 12 months is a bit steep for her. uh she has no interest in relocating her entire
family and then leaving this job. If you look at her her job history, she stays at at her her jobs for for many years, but 12 months is just a bit much. So, in a showing of good faith, she's willing to agree to 6 months, and that ties
nicely to the the severance um package that she came to the table with. >> Okay. board comment on that response. >> Madam Chair, >> Dr. Holes. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. U Madam Chair,
can can um can we be briefed on the severance package that was provided to the prior um general counsel? >> Um Dr. Heepburn uh Dr. Lazada
Let me take a moment to pull up the >> Okay, Madam Chair, in the meantime, while they're finding that information, can you al can also can we also be brief on the difference in the healthc care package [snorts] being provided to Miss uh Depri Bruno as opposed to the prior
general counsel? the difference in financial cost. >> Um, so I I can speak to that piece. Uh, Miss Batista had all of her dependents covered. Uh, Miss the health insurance package for um, Mr. Debri Berno is like
the rest of us. So, um, it the originally what she was asking for would have cost $49,000. Um, now it's much less. I think it's around $16,000, but I don't know if staff can give more specific numbers to
that. Um, and I'm looking through Miss Batista's severance, but I believe it was um a little bit different. >> Okay. And Madam Chair, if you could tell us um or if staff could tell us the exact dollar difference between the
healthc care package for prior council versus Miss uh Dri Bruno that she is negotiating. um which would clearly indicate the the the the um savings the district will realize with hiring Miss
Bruno. >> Does staff need a moment? >> Yes. There. Um give staff a moment. Um Dr. Holdness they're researching right now >> also. And um uh can it be confirmed that the fringe benefits being provided to Miss Dri Bruno is less than the prior
general counsel? >> Yes, that is confirmed. >> Okay. And madame chair, if we could get um a difference in the dollar amount that the school district will um realize uh based upon prior general counsel
versus the current one we're seeking to hire as far as fringe benefits and healthcare and uh salary. >> Okay. >> In addition to that, Madam Oh, >> go ahead. >> Right. In addition to that, Madam Chair,
um I I am [clears throat] I am uh not very uh satisfied that it it has come down to this in terms of the um the moving expense and I I see that
Miss Dri Bruno Bruno is trying to come up with a compromise and um I'm supportive of the six months that uh she's suggesting. I am just very concerned that we are sort of heading in
a direction that seems um that we have not done this before. Um and I'm just wondering where where it's leading uh as we move forward. But I am going to be supportive of the six month and I hope we can we can quickly uh u move forward
with this contract and welcome Mr. P Bruno to B County Schools. >> Thank you. And I can answer um the first question. I just wanted to be sure, but I I I thought I knew, but I wanted to be sure. I'm looking at Miss Batista's agreement around severance. Um and uh it
says that she would be uh eligible for 20 weeks compensation. Um if it was termination by mutual agreement, um I believe that would be that is that is different than the contract uh that we negotiated with Miss
D. Bruno, she offered up the language that mirrors the superintendent's contract, which is I believe no severance for the first 6 months and then you she would acrue um a certain amount of weeks per month uh for the ne for the next six months. Um [snorts] she
offered that up on her own valition. Um and I don't know if staff is ready. Go ahead. Good afternoon. Susan Rocklman, executive director, talent management. Dr. Holes, I believe you had a question about the healthc care cost. >> My question is, what is the difference
in the comprehensive package for the contract of the prior general counsel to the current general counsel that we're seeking to hire in terms of health care costs, fringe benefits, and the salary difference? >> So, for the total health care cost for Mrs. Batista, we covered her dependent.
So that was a cost of 35,600 including her and her dependent. For Miss Buno, it would only be her the employee and that employee cost is $16,731. Okay. So for the total difference in comprehensive cost for the health care,
the fringe benefit and the salary, what is that total value in in difference uh of cost to the district? >> Let me come back to you with those exact numbers. >> Okay. And madam chair just to confirm uh Miss Batista had 21 20 weeks you
mentioned. >> Yes. And Miss Dri Bruno Bruno is foregoing that uh at least for the first six months. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Miss Bull or are you done with Dr. Holes? Staff will come back to you.
>> As soon as I get correct when when staff comes back I can come back on. >> Miss Bulman. Thank you chair. Um I was going to suggest the same thing. I think it aligns nicely since um that's uh you know you already have the six month
severance. So I support that and I also think um we need to Dr. Holes's point and I think we need to remember too we're comparing the contracts which is reasonable but we have a person here who's already s served as a general
counsel for six years in another large district. When we hired Miss Batista, she was not had not been a general counsel before. So, you're taking someone that actually has a lot of experience coming in. I think we need to be giving her that respect and she's definitely negotiating in good faith,
has made concessions. She's moving a significant distance away and uprooting her family to come here. So, you know, I don't want to be going back and forth over a few thousand dollars and ruining our chance to have an excellent new
general counsel. I think that we, you know, if we align it with the six months, then that all works out perfectly. But other than that, I don't support this motion. >> Miss, thank you. I agree and thank you for
continuing to try to work this out. I just have concerns that if we continue to nitpick every little thing, we're going to scare somebody away, and we don't want to do that. So, I appreciate the six months. It does align with the
severance. I would support that. >> Again, do we need to make a substitute motion then? >> Go ahead, Miss Pullman. >> And I think just to when you're looking at the contract, the things that are reimburseable are limited. And you know,
if she's moving here and she's either buying a house or entering into a year lease, I mean, that's going to be at her own cost. Like, it's not going to be something that she's going to want to do because she's already going to be bound by those things. So I think yeah getting in the weeds with this is of you know kind of beyond what we need to be doing
right now. >> Miss Hixon. >> Thank you. So I'd like to make a substitute motion to Mrs. Aladd's motion and make it 6 months not 12 months. >> Second. >> Moved by Miss Hixon. Second by Dr. Zean. Public comment on the substitute motion. >> Dr. Natalie [snorts] Lynch Walsh
Plantation Florida. I support the motion. Um as someone stated, Mr. Dewi Bruno and her attorney have been negotiating in good faith. Negotiations are give and take. If this were um the land of Oz and lollipops and butterflies
that she was walking into, you could go with 12 months and nobody would bat an eye. But this is the fires of Mordor that we're at. We're at the gates of Mordor currently. You can deny all you want, but it's not sunshine and rainbows. So, she's got to mitigate the risk that through no fault of her own,
stuff could go sideways after six months. I think anyone could probably hang on for six months, but a year was a little bit much. So, this recognizes where the district is currently. Remember, I advise go getting into this. I think you're rushing it and she may
live to realize that. But, but if you're negotiating in good faith, this is good faith. Six months is reasonable. It matches with she's giving and taking. You guys have to do some give and take as well. So I appreciate the motion. I support it. Thank you. >> Any other public comment on the motion
board discussion on the substitute motion? >> Madam Chair, >> Dr. Holes. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. So um um I I would much rather uh that this was not on the table, but I am certainly uh at a
much better place with the 6 months than with the one year. So, I will I'll probably say reluctantly support it uh just so we can move forward. And as board member Hixon mentioned, I hope we just don't continue to nitpick. We have a great candidate coming from Lee County
General Counsel for 6 years. I I believe uh based upon the resume and what we've seen, we're very uh fortunate here. Uh I just don't want to continue to nitpick. Um, I think the overall comprehensive package is much less than what we were paying our prior general counsel in
terms of fringe benefits, health benefits, and salary. And we're getting a top-notch candidate here. So, I hope we can we can move forward and and uh hopefully there won't be any other items that are where we're trying to save a
dollar at the risk of losing a great council. >> Thank you. And I believe staff has the numbers you were requesting now. So, going off of Miss Batista's original contract where she received 248,000
leaving out the referendum dollars and I didn't include the moving expenses because that's up to 15,000. Um, so based on the static items in the contract, uh, Miss Deploy Bruno's current contract
is 9,324 dollars less than what Batista's was originally when she first became. >> And just if you could clarify, you're basing that on the on the 248 that she was making, not the 265 that she's making now. >> Correct.
>> Correct. And and Madam Chair, thank you Dr. Lozano for that information. Um, and I I once again reiterate that getting a great uh general counsel to our district. Um, uh, at a a cost that's
less than what we had before. Um, I think we are we are in a wonderful place. Um, and I am very very happy that we've made this choice um, at a great price. Um, so I am ready and willing to move forward.
>> And then Dr. Lozano again >> to answer Dr. opponent's second question. Um, per the contracts we reviewed, note staff had language about reimbursing the moving expenses for the ones that had moving expenses in their contract.
>> Thank you. >> Madam Chair, I just want to make a final comment. >> Uh, uh, Mrs. uh the pre- Bruno will be the first where we included this and um if we are if this is where we're going
to be in the future then I hope this is consistent in our future hireies as well. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other board discussion on the substitute motion? All in favor of the substitute motion say I. >> All oppose say no.
uh item or substitute motion passes unanimously with one dissenting vote from Mrs. Allaid. So it doesn't pass unanimously. It passes uh 8 to one. My apologies. All right. Uh we are back to the item. So as requested by uh Miss Pri
Bruno Bruno's council, if anyone has any motions they would like to make um in your comments, please let us know so that these are things they can consider. Um, any other board discussion on item two? All right. All in favor of item two as
amended say I. I. All oppose say no. >> I. >> Item passes amended unanimously. [applause] Oh, [applause] I don't know if Mr. Drew Bruno would
like to make some comments. Thank you so much, chair and uh staff, administration. Dr. Hepper, I am so looking forward to joining your team and coming on board. I've had an opportunity to watch your meetings because I I've been keeping tabs on everything and um I
I I'm just I'm just so excited and I'm I'm hoping that I will be able to add to the success of Broward County, to the success of the governance of this board and to the administration so you continue to do what's right for kids. So, I'm I'm so excited. I I'm going to
try to get here as soon as I can. Um, I I do have some family obligations, but I'm going to do my best. In the meantime, I know that you have a great interim, uh, Miss Kathleen Jack Adams, who will be standing in keeping the seat warm, and I'm looking forward to, uh, working with her in the transition. And,
uh, I have some ideas, but, I'm going to hold that from my 90-day plan that I talked to you about in my 101s. Thank you so much. [applause] and uh he's sticking around for the next item, but I do want to publicly acknowledge Mr. Walter Harvey again. Um
he has been [applause] he has been with this board through so many trials and tribulations, so much of the the the interesting events over the last few years, and I'm just so grateful he does this um he does this for us at at you know, and he he doesn't have to.
So, thank you, Mr. Harvey. I don't know if you want to say some words or >> through the chair. I promise I won't be long. I just thank you. It's always a pleasure to to, you know, serve public schools. And you, Madame Chair, and previous chairs and and members of the
board, it's always a pleasure to be here. You guys are great. You guys are doing great work. And I'm always excited to to be here and serve the district. Um, if you need any, you know, anything else within reason, I'm [laughter] here.
>> All right. Thank you so much. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. All right. Um, do we need a brief two-minute recess to to rearrange for item number three? Thank you. Hey, hey, hey. Down.
Hey. Hey. All right, we are back. Could I get a motion in a second to move item three to the floor? >> Second. >> Moved by Miss Thompson, seconded by Dr. Zean to move item three to the floor. Uh, do we have public comment on item number three?
>> No. Wow. >> Uh, sorry, I was outside. Uh, Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. Obviously, um, as part of cancelling the no counsel left behind initiative, you have to fix the interim potentially fix this contract as well to
mirror the language that you just fixed on the permanent general counsel. So, hopefully that gets fixed. Um, I know this is a short-term interim period and also that indemnification clause, if that's in there, fix that as well. Um, and then you should be good to go. But,
um, plan from a planning standpoint, you have attorney client at three and one more item. It would be nice as a member of the public to kind of know how we can gauge the rest of today. Thank you. >> That concludes our register of speakers. >> Thank you. Board discussion on item
number three. Um, I brought this item forward. You can see the minutes. Uh, any board discussion on item number three? Miss Hixon, I to the speaker's point and the the
conversation that we had earlier, I don't know that it that where we would fit in because this doesn't really talk about that 5.5% um that I can see about there. That's I'm going to guess in her original
contract and since that contract's going to come back to us, we would address it then. I just want to say it out loud for for the public. Is that [clears throat] the right cadence? >> Dr. Heburn. >> Yes. As a go ahead, Miss Dr. Lozano.
>> So, yeah, it's not part of this contract. This is only to this position of intram and her current salary fits within pay D. So even with the new language from item one this morning, she she is not in band and above based on
her current salary. Okay. Thank you. And the indemnification um the that part 5.3, do we need to tweak that at all based on what we just did
with the general counsel? Um because it says shall and I believe we move shall to may right. >> Can anyone can staff speak to that? >> So from the sh to the may was about the
board members meeting with the general counsel privately not about this particular piece. >> Okay. Okay. So, thank you for clarifying, >> chair. I think she was referencing the admin addimification
>> contract. Thank you. Um, and we added the two things to it. However, it says to the extent permitted by Florida statute. So, I don't know if that covers what we changed in the previous contract. So, that would be a question for legal, but I think it's already
there. Um, I don't know if our count if our council can speak to that, Mr. Harvey, if we need to add any of the indemnification language. [clears throat] >> Uh, yes, through the chair. If there are
no objections from Miss Jacques Adams, uh we we can add that language to the proposed agreement. >> I do not have any objections with adding those two statutory provisions that you referenced in Miss Dri Bono's contract.
And um as a suggestion, it does say to the extent permitted by Florida statutes, you can add including and then reference the two statutes or I'm fine with the language that you utilized in her contract. >> Okay. So I'd like to make a motion to
add after it says state statutes including and list the two statutes on this particular contract. And just for the record, those two statutes were 111.07 Florida statutes and 1012.26
Florida stat. >> Moved by Miss Hixon, second by Dr. Zean. Public comment on the motion for comment on the motion. >> All in favor of the motion say I. I. >> All post say no. >> Uh motion passes unanimously.
Anything else, Miss Hixon? >> That's it. >> Mrs. Alhadaf. >> Uh yes. So, I have a question in regards to past interim general counsel's additional compensation. What was that?
>> That was um >> 5,000 per month. >> 5,000 per month to bring uh that salary up to 250. >> Okay. But in in on page four, we're at $5,875 per month.
>> That's correct. And that does not bring that that brings her up to 230. >> Wait a minute. Say that again. The first part. >> So per the So with Miss Batista and Miss Mrick in the last two interim general
counsels, they uh took $5,000 a month. They had a $5,000 a month supplement which brought them up to um the the general counsel position. Um, so for Miss Batisa, that brought her up to 250.
Um, Miss Jack Adams salary is lower than that of what Miss Batista's was. Um, so this the 5,800 uh brings her up to 230. Is that >> Got it. Am I misstating that, Dr. Lozano? Okay,
>> that is correct. >> The the summary uh says 225. So, can we just clarify what the total comp is? It's either 230 or 225. My math could have been off. >> Yeah, the 5875 plus the 154500
adds to 225. >> I have no further comments. Thank you. >> Any other board discussion while staff works on that? Miss Bulman? >> Well, um I'm just happy that Miss Jackie Adams is willing to serve in this capacity for us and I look forward
forward to working with her. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other board discussion or comment? >> Dr. Zean, do you need that number to vote? I just wanted um I didn't want the
record to be wrong, I guess. >> Okay. >> I think what we're voting on is an increase of 5875, so I don't need the total. >> Got it. All right. All in favor of item three as amended, say I. >> I. >> All oppose say no. >> Item passes unanimously. Congratulations.
[cheering and applause] >> Welcome, >> Miss Jack Adams. Do you want to say a few words? Absolutely. Thank you very much for trusting me um with you during this interim period until Mr. Brono comes in.
Um I'm delighted to be representing you um each one of you for the benefit of the children of Broward County. So, I really look forward to working hard um and as uh Kathy said, keeping the seat warm for her, ensuring that we take care
of any issues that presents itself during this interim period of time. And once again, thank you very much. I look forward to working with each and every one of you. >> Thank you. And thank you again to Mr. Harvey. All right. Absolutely. [clears throat] Could I
We have another recess for about two minutes, please. >> [cough] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Oh, you do. All right, we are back. Could I get a
motion in a second to move item number four to the floor? >> So moved. Second. >> Moved by Miss Hixon, second by Miss Thompson. Item number four is on the floor. Public comment on item number four. >> Yes, Madam Chair. We have four public speakers. First, Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, followed by Dad Dy Keith
Lascoitz. Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. So, as a member of the facilities task force since 2011, former chair, former chair of the audit committee, um I would be one of the speakers you would want to ask questions
of, but I don't necessarily expect that to happen. Um so, I would say no to this item. I sent you an email yesterday and suggested that there was more bloat in this item than in a Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade balloon because
there is. I also sent you a snippet and a link to the Atkins report, the most recent one for November, showing where the program, such as it is, is if you have four projects in design, why do you need a full-time design
manager when they were just at.5? again with the omitted information. They could have brought you the backup that showed the staffing plan from the last extension compared to the agreement, but
did not do that. I couldn't even get AI to do that. So, I had to manually copy and paste, but I did pull it off to be able to see some comparisons. Um, and again, a hard no. The 45% is part a big part of the problem. It was a part of
the problem in 2020. it remains a problem. Now, at a recent board meeting, you guys tried to reduce things that you did not need, but I hope that you're looking at the staffing plans because my advice, even though we're in the 11th
hour, is to tell them no and go back and look at the staffing plans and take out anything that does not match where you are in the program. Because if you do it now, that's being proactive and that's better than having the inspector
general, auditor general, state attorney, a grand jury looking into it. You don't want to get there, but we can get there because, you know, I've already done the work to start cobbling this together. So, if you're already done with mostly procurement, why are
you upping that? SMWBE, they were at 0.5 one and a half persons. We're now at two. They've disappeared entire cons contra um partners and given their people that were half a person a full person under the ex the ones that
they're moving them to the subconsultants. So there's a lot of waste. You talked about communications last time. What are we communicating at this point? Again, according to Atkins, most everything is in construction. Then it
goes to closeout. Then you're done. Remember, you were supposed to be done a few months ago, so the staffing is too high for where you are in the program. So, please tell them no. Take it back and have them come back next week at a
special meeting, all serious, with their best and final offer. Find the intestinal fortitude to do it because you're being duped again and you're under duress. Vote no. >> Next speaker, Dy Keith Lazawick. Good morning or good afternoon. Um,
Dodie Keith. Um, I am chairman and majority woman owner of Keith. I'm a locally headquartered third generation firm with over 200 team members that have served this district and many others for many years. Broward County is my home. I'm a graduate of Fort Lard
High School. My children went to school here. My grandchildren went to school here and are part of this system today. My entire career has been based right here in Broward County. And through our growth and success, Keith is even a graduate of your MWB program many years
ago. This is not just where I work or where I it is where I live. This is home. I appreciate the opportunity to speak today, though I do so with deep disappointment regarding AECOM's actions throughout this contract and the prior RFQ process. It is highly unusual for me
to address my contract matters publicly. However, the level of deceit, greed, and corporate interests surrounding this contract compels me to speak. In my work, I believe success should be built on integrity, mentoring others, sharing
opportunities, and creating partnerships that allow everyone to exceed together. This emergency contract before you today is frankly an insult not just to me but to this district all MWB programs everywhere and to our entire community.
It reflects pure greed and entitlement. AECOM has deliberately removed two local firms and significantly reduced a third firm's participation as retaliation for not being exclusively under their
control in future RFPs and contracts. This is not about services no longer needed. If they want, they want our staff. They are removing firms from this contract, Keith being one of them, and hiring our employees. They are poaching our employees and moving them to
nonbroward firms. This is unethical and demonstrates bad faith in negotiations with all the local businesses as well as the district itself. Even this emergency contract speaks to diversity and vendor
participation which AECOM has made sure they won't do. I believe you have a better option. I stand here today with an option to offer you. If ACOM cannot honor their commitments to local businesses and small businesses in this community that are here in Broward based
on how they've did it, if they cannot consider awarding the contract properly and staffing it properly and not poaching our own teams, I stand here today and tell you Keith is prepared to prime this contract. You can hire a local team to prime this contract. Keith can build this team. I've been part of
this team. We can hold all the subcon sub consultants in place. We can ramp this down. We can meet your schedules and we can save you money. I ask you, let's lead with integrity and fairness. Don't let intimidation and fear rule this day. This is not the Broward way. I
ask you, keep these opportunities local and Keith is here to serve you as you see fit. Next public speaker is Shawn Davis followed by Vicente Thrower. Good afternoon, chair, vice chair, and members of the school board. My name is
Sha Davis of Weston, Florida, and I'm here today representing S. Davis and Associates, a certified small business that has been in good standing with the district for more than 25 years. Our firm is headquartered in Hollywood, Florida. We employ Broward County
residents, pay property taxes here, and are deeply invested in this community. In addition, I serve along with Dodie on the Broward workshop, which exists to ensure that Broward County businesses have a voice. For over two decades, S.
Davis and Associates has partnered with the school board on numerous projects consistently delivering professional reliable service aligned with the district's mission. For the past six years, we've been a part of the program manager owners representation team under
AECOM. During that time, our team has provided key services including commissioning, leadership, project and assistant project management, senior and project accounting, estimating and contract compliance. Our personnel have
received positive performance reviews every year. We were therefore surprised and concerned to learn only after we initiated a call that ACOM had removed S. Davis from this contract. This is not
the Broward way. We did not rem request removal and we were not informed in advance. This decision was made unilaterally without explanation or notice. I understand that our staff are being moved to other teams.
While the contract with ACOM has not always been smooth, we worked through challenges as a team, always prioritizing the best interest of the school district. We supported ACOM in multiple meetings to help ensure project
continuity and success. Importantly, all team members were told that when the contract ends in 2026, there the existing team would move forward together. That understanding was later changed again without noticed by ECOM.
It is difficult to stand to understand why S. Davis and Keith are being removed when our personnel performed well and received stronger valuations. This decision has a significant negative financial and business impact on our
firm. It also affected our ability to participate on other teams as ACOM chose not to engage us elsewhere. Our request today is straightforward. We respectfully ask that the school board review the staff recommendations for this agenda item and consider the
performance qualifications and long-standing service. We ask that the qualified team members be included in the extended contract. We are seeking fairness, transparency, and continuity principles with this board that the board has long standed for. Thank you
for your consideration. Vincente throw up um Pumpino Beach. Um madame chair and to the board members, it seemed like it's a neverending story. Um we get commitments in our community and our schools are still looking the same. I read the articles and the sun
silo and I hear all the board members comments and the superintendent's statement. But as a third generation pumping old beach, my grandparents, like I always tell y'all, we pick beans here. And we were proud to be bean pickers. But when does our story change? Now here
we are again once again having a company that ain't based in Broward County, ain't probably a based in Florida, trying to put our local people out of business and tell them, "Well, we don't have to honor nothing." But guess what? You all committed to us a long time ago that it's going to be about Broward
County first. When does it become about our kids? What does this say about your leadership when a when a gigantic company can come and push our local vendors around and then try to hold you all hostage too at the same time? If this county is ever to move forward
and talk about doing a future referendum, all this is going to play back. Why would the black church ever support any other future referendums and give you [snorts] all the power to decide who gets what if you're going to
let a big company take your word and say, "Okay, well, we're going to hold you hostage and not do what we say we're going to do." To the chair, you got to be about your word. My issue with this is once again, the small businesses in Broward County are
getting pushed around again. What do we do about that? Let's tell these jokers if they don't want to do right, hey, they can go kick rocks. Our children deserve to know that you all, the superintendent included, fight for our families, fight for local people
first. And do you know how hard it is to come down to this meeting this time of the day and then to come here at 9:00 and try to be here also? So, I hope that we do make some changes about some of these meetings again because the the the average voter wants to come to these
board meetings, but they work. So, I hope that we give some consideration and hire some firms that are fighting. And by the way, one more thing before I sit down. I want to know how many of these firms actually participate in our communities. MLK Day is right around the corner. I guarantee
you half these people sucking the blood money of out county don't even don't even recognize MLK Day. So, [snorts] I hope that this board will consider sticking to what your promise was made when you floated this first bond the first time. Well, I can tell you right now, I will be at the black church and
saying we ain't never supporting another bond. Thank you. >> That concludes our register of speakers. >> For discussion on item number four, >> Miss Hixon, >> Madam Chair, can you put me on the list? >> Yes, she can go first.
>> Go ahead, Miss Rupert. Thank you. Um I am absolutely saddened and alarmed that we are here again and uh I believe only six months ago uh Chair Leonardi had said we're hopefully
we're not going to be here in 6 months but we are again. Um, I can tell you that our minority businesses here in town have had to fight for every aspect that they possibly can to get into contracts and not only get to be subcontractors, but also to have the
equity part of being part of those contracts. I know that when AECOM had um G, Shawn Davis, and Keith um we had a higher percentage. Um, don't hold me to this. I believe it was 48%.
But, um, you know, I'll I'll let you guys work out the numbers there, but looking at the numbers on this new one, it's lower than the 48. And, um, I personally um can't stomach the amount of uh pushing and shoving around that
are our our local businesses receive with this. You know, what what is the better option to to start over? We'll be losing more time. Is it B have Keith do a bid? I don't know if that's the right
decision either. Or have the three firms um G, Keith, and Shawn Davis to be able to be put back in and have the same amount of business that they have. Um so
that would be my two goals um uh to help this situation. And um not for nothing, large part of our schools that are still undone are in the PMPO area. So I not only have a vested interest as a parent,
um as a taxpayer, but as a board member of that district to to basically say, hey, this needs to stop. We need to keep the integrity and everybody needs to get together to do that. So I don't know. Um
those are conversations to have. Um, but I'm 100% supportive of our minority businesses, small women, uh, enterprises, and, uh, will do anything I possibly can to fight for them. So, um, unfortunately, I cannot be there now, so
I'm calling you in traffic to get on the record for this, but I'm going to be on uh, silent and listening uh, until I get to my husband's important thing today. But um, I I'm here. I support them. I I'm hoping for a reconciliation to
happen or [snorts] get all the the people together and see what can be done in in in the amount of time and what is actually the best moving forth for the district, for our schools, our kids, our communities, and our businesses. So, I
definitely support um returning the GA to their original uh percentage to Keith and uh S. Davis. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Hixon. >> Thank you. Um, and I I have a couple of
questions. Hopefully, we can get them answered. So on page four of 20 where it talks about billing instructions and payments, it goes through and it explains um as a condition precedent to payment ACOM shall timely submit um
staffing things. It talks about as a a precedent to payment they shall submit they shall timely submit 12 minutes. So, it all talks about staffing plans, but I am wondering why this doesn't talk about
them projects being completed. So, it it only addresses staffing, but there should be language in here that says they get paid when a certain amount of the projects are done. I had a pool done recently. They got [clears throat] 10% when this part was done. They got 20%
when that part was done. I I don't see anything in here that holds them accountable to making sure the projects are done. And we're in year seven. You know, I know a lot of people have gotten different flak for projects not being completed, but they've been in
charge for a large part of that. And you know, we did get a lot of projects done in the last year and a half when we changed our our COO and started holding people accountable to getting the work done. We got 119 projects done in that time period. So I
would like to see in this contract something that holds them to the fire to make sure. So I before I I try to do something with that I can you remind us I think there's a hundred projects left. Is that correct?
>> That's correct Miss Hixon. So I don't know exact amount but it's over 100. >> Okay. and and is the idea that there's a possibility of all of those projects getting done in the time frame of this contract? >> No. >> So that should be clear in here like so
what is I think as a board we should have a goal and we should say payment happens after certain milestones and I'm not a contractor so I don't know what exactly that looks like. I would need some help um figuring that out. But I
don't like that all that we hold them accountable for is giving us a staffing plan because the staffing plan isn't getting the projects done. It's just giving people money based on how much time they put into something. So, I'm not sure what that looks like. I do have
concerns that were brought up by the um public speaker about the staffing plan and how many people are on here. If we if we're only expecting, let's say, half the projects, I don't know, 50 projects, what does that staffing look like
compared to what we had before? And I do have a huge concern with on an emergency contract making any kind of changes that reduce the people who are already working and getting things done that are local Broward businesses um not being
included in this this staffing. Um, I don't understand why you would make it's a short contract. Why would you make big changes like that in a contract that's for a year or even less? So, I I don't know. I did have a discussion with the superintendent. I don't know how much
leverage we have on that, but I would say that we we also are selling land to someone and said we won't sell it to them unless they have a space for Eagles Haven. So the idea that we have zero doesn't sit right with me because we do
have it in some places. So I I think that we could strongly encourage them to change their mind on that. I'm not so much about the percentage. It is just really about keeping what you already had in place.
But I do have also a huge struggle with us not having in the contract a way to hold them accountable based on how many projects we have we have an expectation for them to be able to complete. So I would like to discuss that with the
board members and see where that fits in here and maybe if legal or somebody could could help with that to where we would change that in this contract. And I would ask the superintendent if we were not to approve this today, what what happens?
>> We would have to get into another contract immediately. Um the turnaround will have to be quick with anybody else um that the the board would want to pursue to have a contract with. But if we don't um approve this today and we don't have a a a proof
contract with um another program manager or con construction group um we just have a we will have a gap in um completing or working on projects. >> So do we not is there no way for us to go into
contracts with the subcontractors ourself and do we not have staff that's able to manage these projects? So there does there's nothing that prevents us from doing that. Ultimately we work at the behest of the board. So if that if that's the um direction of
the board to move in that direction, we will the team would have to work on that immediately um post this meeting. >> Okay. So I I don't know that I I still don't know where I sit in this but I will say that we have had AEO for
a long time and we have not seen the results that we were hoping for. We we did close out the smart we don't call it the smart project smart bond anymore but we know that there are projects we we promised we did promise to you and we've had a discussion on this board since
I've been here about using local Broward companies to do this work. That's one way we also can increase the number of students we have in our schools because if their families are working here, they're going to have pride in what our schools look like and and who's working
in them. And it's it's a good also a good way for us to be able to increase our enrollment. So, I'm not ready to really make any motions, but I I do I don't want to feel like we're a hostage and I don't want to feel like we have to say yes because we had this discussion a
year ago and and said we didn't want to get in this position and I feel like because it's an emergency, there are things that have been inflated in here and um I feel like we're being taken advantage of. >> Thank you, Dr. Zean.
>> Thank you, Chair. Um there's a couple things that the board needs to uh I think really think hard about. Uh one is um chair do you know what percentage of the work uh under this contract would be done by local and MWEBE firms?
>> Dr. Heburn. >> Yes. [snorts] According to the contract u 45%. So my understanding is that's the 45% is the local but I was asking about the local but plus uh MWBE. >> Um we're going to answer questions by
committee. We got U executive director Sonia Kohley in here. Uh we have uh John White executive director or director of procurement. We also have um um Mr. Cooney um assistant general counsel. So I have um guys feel free to jump in when
possible. I'm trying to look for I just had it up literally and it sounds like a rhetorical question Dr. Zean >> while I'm looking. >> It's [laughter] kind of a an analytical one. I know that uh AECOM's share of this is 28%. So I'm assuming that the
balance of subs are all local and MWBE certified firms which would mean 72% of it is done to Miss Hixon's point 72% 45% of that I think local and another the balance of that 72% being MWBE. Uh, two firms, this is John White. I'm director
of procurement. Two firms make up the 45% MWBE and the third firm is not an MWBE. >> Is it a local firm, the third firm? >> Um, I'm not sure. I check. Uh, if you could uh let us know soon, that's great. I just want to kind of go back to our
first principles here, though, that you know, Miss Leonard's point is critically important here. you know, she rightfully said, "Plan B may not work, and I don't want to do a plan C, but that's where we're at." You know, plan A was a piggyback. It got turned down by the board. Plan B was a solicitation
that got uh a reject all bids. And plan C, the principle of plan C is at least the people who are working on this are very familiar with the general contractors. They're familiar with the projects. They're they know how to get to Markham Elementary School. Um and so
the idea was to retain uh the prime and whoever the prime holds. There's a really important contract issue though that we have to resolve and and chair uh a legal question. Um can we tell a prime contractor who to hire as a subcontractor?
>> Miss Jack Adams. So with this contract there is um we are in a contract with the prime which is AECOM. Um and we're not in contract with any of their subs. Um it's direct from
us to AECOM. We cannot dictate to them. This is purely from from a contractual perspective. We cannot dictate to them who they need to have as a subcontractor. This uh particular contract is not under a solicitation, a
formal solicitation. It's under an emergency. And so you are hiring the prime and dictating to them which subcontractor to utilize is um
you're focusing on means and methods and that's something that an owner should not do with a prime. >> Terrific. To my knowledge, uh, again, a legal question, chair, our job is to hold anyone we have a contract with for performance issues. So, if we want to hold a contractor to
getting things done, if we want them to make best progress, if we want to monitor in the Miss Hixon's pool model of 10%, 30% 50% uh uh I get that for the people that are doing the construction. For the people that are doing the program management, we would measure how fast they do change orders, how fast
they do TIA, how fast they uh review and get things to uh permitting and then throughping with inspections. That's what owners reps do. And so we could do that. I mean uh this is a however a short-term project. And I think uh chair this um continues to have a 45% set
aside for local firms. Is that correct? Thank you. They're nodding. So >> that's correct. We can ask the prime to comply with the 45% but to if I understand you correctly general counsel we can't tell them who to hire for that 45%. Otherwise we wouldn't be able to hold AECOM responsible for any one of
the standards that Miss Hixon talked about um because they are the prime. They get to hire subs and then we hold the prime in the same way that we can ask and we do whether you like it or not Mr. Superintendent. We ask the superintendent to do things, but we can't directly task any of the other
30,000 people who work here. Right. And the same relationship, if I'm characterizing this fairly, general counsel, we can ask a prime to do something, but we can't ask a sub. Is that a fair >> yes to that statement? Yes. >> Terrific. And to again to Miss Dixon's point on where we did go to a prime and say we want you to do Eagles Haven. We
can go to the prime and say something like Eagles Haven or something like 45% for local. We just can't we can't tell them, you know, which locals uh to hire. Let me finish though. There's a thing in business called a competed. Do you know what that is, chair?
>> I do not. Please. >> Yeah. A competime is a a really gooned up word. I'm glad you don't know it. I think higher of you for that. Um it's people you're going to compete with later become your teammates. And to the extent that this prime has
done some things that uh the subs don't agree with is very dangerous in business because those subs will get together and they'll figure out to the extent of their will and power and money uh how to come back and win future contracts. And so um there is a Broward way that one of
our speakers talked about. The Broward way is to be honest and have integrity and recognize people you compete with now are going to be your teammates on the next thing. And you got to be very careful and ethical about how you deal with people. So the competitive principle is going to come back and the people that didn't get invited by ecom
this team have every right and every expectation in my mind of coming back and winning this next contract in 6 months. Um so while we can't tell them who to pick, it is dangerous as a business principle to exclude anybody uh especially people uh for which there's
been remarkable performance for decades and decades in Broward County. Uh but that's their choice and our only option really today is to continue with plan C. Unfortunately, we are a little bit over a barrel. The good news is this is a six-month or so solution and then we're going to move forward to uh a full
solicitation. Uh Dr. Hepern has hired some experts uh to come in and and help us with the procurement model uh and to make sure that we follow the the not just the strict letter of the law, but make sure we use best practices and enhanced processes to go through the next solicitation. And I'm confident Dr.
Dr. Heeperin, could you tell us the name of that group that you're talking to or that you've retained to help us? >> Yes, it is >> the inst the National Institute for Public Procurement. >> Terrific. And so that's a group nationally dedicated to making sure that
we do solicitations correctly and things like that. >> Um, so they'll not only teach us how to do it the right way and how to follow best practices, but how to do it quickly. Um, and I'm I'm confident of the team's estimate of six or so months before we get a new one in, plus a transition. And I get that, you know,
there's all kinds of things going on. But we really want, as Broward County School Board, lots of people to bid on these things. We want to establish, you know, fair and equitable practices. And we have to follow the law, and the law says that we can only uh hire a prime. The prime, you know, gets all the rights and privileges of of hiring the
subcontractors. Even though I think this particular strategy uh may uh come back and bite the prime in the butt later on, but we'll we'll see when that all comes together. Um I appreciate the service uh that [clears throat] Keith uh and Davis has provided to Broward County. And this
is not just about this last seven years or so. It's about decades and decades of service. So, thank you and I look forward to seeing your bid in six months. >> Thank you. Um before I go, Mr. CVA, I just want to remind us we do have an attorney client scheduled for 3:00. So
at 3:00, I'm going to recess the meeting to go to attorney client and then we'll come back to the item. Mr. Ca, [snorts] >> there were some accusations that were lodged by um I think two of the speakers regarding the uh removal or exclusion or
I believe the term that was used was poached of uh some of the employees for some of these subs. Um, we've got some ACOM folks in the in the crowd. I've been wondering, chair, if they are willing to um address any of those um accusations that they were made earlier
by the speakers. >> I have a board member asking members of the audience to come forward and address some accusations. >> Michael McIntyre, AECOM program director through the chair. Um, specifically what
was the questions? If memory serves correctly, the speaker, I believe it was Miss Keith, uh had lodged some accusations of uh poaching of employees from some of the subs and for obviously her exclusion
from the um the list, if you will, which I believe for purposes of the record is exhibit I believe it's exhibit A to the contract if I'm not mistaken, in which you identify the the subs that um the staffing Okay.
>> The staffing plan. If you could address that, I'd appreciate it. >> Yes. Um, back pref um business decisions were made um that required AECOM to follow up and make its own business decision.
Um that business decision uh that we made based on other firms decisions uh required us to negotiate agreements with our remaining partners for the RFQ
and for efforts going forward after the RFQ. We have existing contractual agreements with Cordino, with Bach and with Keith, not with Keith, with G.
Um, we have our numbers are 45% MBE between G and Bach. AECOM has a total of 28% actually it's 20 just under 28% of the total value of the proposal and it's a little over 72%
for local firms. Our partners are all local firms. Um I don't know of poaching. We have posted open positions. One person that had been previously cut by one of the firms
applied and was hired. We posted a position, a person applied, the person was hired. I don't know of any others that have been hired by any of the remaining firms. Um,
we did not anticipate moving forward with a different team, but business decisions were made. We made a business decision. We are presently working with both of those firms on other contracts. One is working with us in Miami Dade and
AECOM is working with Keith on multiple projects around Broward and in the area. Um, so there is still a ongoing relationship there. decisions were made associated with the RFQ starting with the piggyback. Um once those decisions
were made, AECOM was put in a position to make its own business decision. We are now contractually obligated to the three team members. So what we're talking about is us unwinding contractual obligations.
I'm not I'm not sure my three team members are going to voluntarily unwind a contractual obligation that we have with them. It would become ligious. That that is just the reality. It would become ligious
if we were to unwind existing signed contractual arrangements. >> Thank you, Cher. If I if I may, I've got a couple more things, not necessarily for the speaker, but um next for the for the superintendent. Um
we heard again from one of the uh the first speakers that um they would be willing and able to propose um basically uh the same type of work, the same scope of work that's in the pending AECOM
contract um presumably for for less money or more incentive. I don't I don't remember exactly what the comment that was made was. So my question is, was any other vendor consulted with or given the opportunity to fill in this um stop gap,
if you will, uh until this uh RFQ fiasco can be uh resolved and properly sent back out? >> No. Um the negotiations were directly with AECOM. >> Is there a reason for that, sir? Uh yes, due to the emergency situation and um
thinking about continuity moving forward to get through this emergency declaration uh so we can um continue the existing projects and be able to get through our RFQ process in a timely manner uh with a good transition. >> Does the emergency nature of what we're
dealing with specifically require us only to deal with the the current vendor? Does it exclude us from going looking outside, if you will? >> No, it doesn't. So the decision was made within the district just to continue with the ecom for continuity purposes. >> Correct.
>> And I I apologize. I think Miss Hixon asked this. I don't know if I got an answer because I know there were several questions that were lodged simultaneously. If in fact this contract is not signed today, what will happen to these projects? Are
we able to use current staff um or folks at our disposal to basically step in the shoes of AECOM to make sure that um you know these projects continue or at the very least don't face um extravagant delays? >> No, we're we're not as far as government
Bard County public school staff, we're not staffed up with with those capabilities to carry out projects um like that across the board. uh we would have to negotiate with another construction company or or program manager um and bring that to the board
um next week. It would it'll be u definitely a fasttracked um negotiation. >> Do we even have the ability to do that? I mean you can meet with with another company, you can meet with other folks and you can get come up with whatever
terms staff will come up with. get it approved by legal. Presumably legal looked at this or at least I hope they did. Get it approved by legal and get this back in front of a board within a week. >> We we have the internal fortitude. Again, negotiations are with two parties. So it would be they would have
to have the same level of fortitude and effort to get it done. >> Realistically, do you think that that's something that can >> in an emergency situation? Um all things are possible. >> So this is not like we have to sign this contract today or the world is going to end. Um
I I I would say we need to be in something real really soon. Um as late as next week. >> Have you contact Have you contacted or dealt with or even had any conversations with any other vendors outside of AECOM in relation to the scope that's within this contract now? >> No sir. >> So you'd be basically starting from
scratch. >> Correct. >> Thank you chair. >> Thank you. We have four minutes till I'm going to recess the meeting. Uh so Miss Bulman is next on the list. Thank you Sher. Um well you know as we're discussing all
of this obviously we're in this position which we had tried to avoid and here we are sitting in exactly the position that we did not want to be in. And so all of my colleagues questions are very pointed for you know how we're going to deal
with this. >> [laughter] >> in this emergency situation. Um, I think looking at the big picture first of all, we're talking about, you know, looking at the procurement process and all of
those things. And I think I brought this up at the last meeting, but the first thing that I want the board to do is to have a workshop so that we can decide how we want that program to look because we don't have any business
putting an RFQ out until we know what we want as a board for this program to look like. So, I think that's the first priority and I would love to get that on I don't know how my colleagues feel, but I'd love to get that on the schedule ASAP so that we can all discuss it
because it clearly is going to require our leadership on that and what we want and what we need moving forward because there's a lot of good questions coming out. Do we need a giant multinational firm to do this? Can we have more uh smaller local businesses handling this work? I I think that's something that we
as a board need to decide and give direction to the superintendent on. So, if we can put that on the calendar for >> Yeah, if I may, Miss Bowman, we sent I know we sent a lot of uh information out yesterday. So, um a lot of information was sent out. One of one of the memos we
did send out was the the procurement process for uh this particular RF RFQ that you're talking about and it has a specific timeline. The first actual um action is to have a workshop with the board on February the 3rd >> um to make a decision of how we move
forward, what the board like to see as far as um um addressing our our our construction projects, if it's a um program manager, if it's a uh construction manager, agent owners rep. Um and so all so we already have that already uh scheduled and ready to go.
And uh timeline ends uh um uh hopefully at uh no later than June. So it's a specific timeline in that memo uh along with a um um onepage uh presentation flyer to kind of detail it out um outside of a memo. And I hope that um
the the staff will be bringing us various options so that and well-informed options so that we actually have the ability to make some decisions because it's going to be very important that we have the right balance in place moving forward. Um, so one
thing that I saw in the contract here that I just was wondering now we've got a very hopeful one-year term unless we terminate it before. Um, it seems to me I and maybe I missed it, but it doesn't
there's no option to extend this contract at all. Um, and while I'm very hopeful that we'll have this done within the 12-month period, I think that we might want to look at having an option to expand this contract just uh, you
know, maybe two different times for two periods, like if we had two options to extend it for a six-month period or something of that nature. I don't know how you guys feel about that. So, we don't have to come back, renegotiate, and be in another emergency situation. We can always we can always cancel it
upon 30 days written notice. So it doesn't put us in a in a worse position, but it would give us a little bit more flexibility if we need that. Does anyone know? So I I would move that we add to
the option to extend the contract for six months to two six month options to contract. >> Moved by Miss Bulman, seconded by Dr. Zean. It is 3:00, so we'll deal with um public comment and then we'll recess the meeting and we'll come back to board
discussion on this motion. Public comment on the motion. Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. Um it seems you're putting the cart before the horse trying to extend when you haven't even established when these projects will end because in a
year they should be able to end if every if you're you're certainly going to be paying them enough. So, that would be a hard no to that motion for me until you figure out uh you don't even know if you're approving this thing. So, why are we extending it? You need to be saying
no, no, no, and bring it back again. The staffing plan is a problem. Mrs. Hixon identified a problem where there's no end to this. We just keep bleeding money that could be going to students. So, uh take your recess, think about it, but that's a hard no on this one.
Dodie Keith with Keith Pompo Beach and extension is absurd. With all due respect, you should not even be approving this contract. And let's make sure we understand what local is. What do you think local is when we say the Broward Way? The only firm in the emergency contract that you're looking
at that is a Browardbased firm is G. Cordino is Dural. AOC is international. And Bach is Miami. You are When I go to Dade, I've had an office down there for
15 years. They call me Broward. They let me work, but they don't call me local. Born and raised here, operating my business here. Shawn Davis the same. You are not doing anything for your local firms, and they are poaching our people.
what was submitted to your staff on December 17th by ACOM. The staffing plan given to your staff had an extra column that had names of employees. The names of my employees are on here with their salaries. What's in your contract
removes one column, the names poaching staff of local firms. Do not extend this contract. Don't even sign it. >> Thank you. Next public comment. >> Baron Channerbach, subcontractor on this program. Uh I I'd like to correct the
record just a little bit because I I think there's a little bit of misrepresentation particularly of of my firm. Bach is BA. BA is Baron. I'm Baron Channer. My local business tax receipt in Broward County says I'm a Broward County company. my the majority of my
employees, including my business partner who owns equity in the company, who lives in Broward County and has kids in this school system, says that we're a Broward County company. And for the last several years, the school district has considered us such after tremendous scrutiny. What's really going on here?
And listen, I I empathize with everyone, but business decisions were made. The reality is had the RFQ proceeded as it was going and had every other team other than ACOM 1, Bach would have been would have disappeared and our employees would have been taken and we would have been
upset and I would probably cry to all of you. But the reality is I would have picked the wrong situation. That's what's happened here. People made business decisions and the business decisions did not work out. I'm not here to try to harm anyone, but trying to
force AECOM to take other people means AECOM is going to try to force us to give up certain people. And as AOC correctly alluded to you, >> that may have consequences. >> Thank you. >> Very briefly, I'm Alan Patterson with the Cordino Group. I'd just like to
clarify that we have had our firm has been in business for uh 55 years. Uh we've been in Broward County for 40 of those years and we've been doing work with the Broward School Board for most of that time. So I just wanted to make that clear. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Voter Broward County. So I'm just asking the question to the board. What are we going to do? Um it seems to be um I just have to say this. I'm calling some names. Madam Chair, I'm g sit down. Board member Zean to the chair. It's
about Broward County First. Understand? Broward County First. I'm sticking to this subject. I'm gonna preach this sermon all year long. Broward County First to the Superintendent. Broward County First. That's That's my sermon. Thank you so much.
>> Board members, I am advised that the general counsel would like to request an attorney client session. At this time, I'm requesting all persons not scheduled to attend the attorney client session, plea, please exit the room at this time. Miss Jack Adams. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to request the school board convene an
attorney client session in order to discuss litigation pending before the 17th judicial circuit in and for Broward County, Florida in the following matter. helping advance and nurture the development of youth incorporated versus the school board of Broward County. Case
number CACE25 018325. The following persons will attend this attorney client session. School board members Sarah Leonardi chair Dr. Jeff Holes, vice chair, Lorie Alhadef, Mara
McCarthy Bulman, Adam Seiraa, Esquire, Deborah Hixon, Nora Rupert, Rebecca Thompson, Dr. Alan Zean, Dr. Howard Hepburn, Superintendent of Schools, Thomas Cooney, Esquire, Kathleen Jacques Adams,
Esquire, and Marilyn Batista, Esquire, BCS. In anticipation of this request, the attorney client session was properly advertised for today, January 6, 2026 at 3 PM in accordance with section 286.011 subsection 8 of the Florida statutes.
The purpose of the attorney client session is to discuss settlement negotiations and or strategy relative to the pending litigation. A certified court reporter will record the session. Only those persons noted in the advertisement will be permitted to attend. Madam Chair,
>> at this time the school board of Broward County, Florida will recess this special school board meeting for an attorney client session. The attorney client session will be held in the boardroom on the first floor of the Kathleen C. Wright Administration Center, 600 Southeast 3rd Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33301. The attorney client
session will take approximately 30 minutes. At the conclusion of the business of the attorney client session, the special school board meeting will reconvene. All persons not scheduled to attend the attorney client session, please exit the room at this time. Hey, hey, hey. [music] [music] >> [music]
>> Everybody down. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Oh. Yeah. W Yeah. Wo. [music] Yeah. [music]
Yeah. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. What are you? [music] [music] >> [music] [music]
>> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. >> [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] >> or down. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Get down.
Down [music] down down down down down. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> B.
Heat. Heat. I see there. [music] I feel there. Woah. Yeah. [music] Woah. Yeah. Yeah. [cheering]
Hey. Hey. Hey. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey, [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music]
>> Mhoo. Mh. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. >> [music] [music] [music] [music]
>> Okay. [music] Yeah. Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] >> Down. [music] [music] Hey. Hey. >> [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] >> What are you doing? >> [music] >> Hey dick. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat.
>> [music] [music] >> Everybody. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Oh yeah. Wo.
I see. Wo. Yeah. Yeah. [music] Yeah. >> [music] [music] >> I'm [music] down.
Hey, hey, hey. [music] >> [music] [music] >> Hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. All of them. >> [music] [music] >> M. Oh.
Heat. Heat. down. Heat. Yeah. Yeah. Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] [music] >> Okay,
I want >> [music] >> Do you know [music] hey Heat. Heat. [music] Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Hey, Heat.
Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey,
Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, >> [music] [music] >> This special schoolboard meeting is now reconvened. Um, just to remind the board, we're considering item four. Miss Bulman made a motion. We took public
comment on the motion. The motion was to uh provide for some extensions. I don't have the exact wording. Uh, but just to remind everyone, Miss Hixon. So, I um I don't agree with adding extensions
into this. It's an emergency item because we are it's a stop gap and I don't want to give any um impression that we want to make it prolong it any. So I I don't agree with
adding extensions. Any other comment on the motion? >> No other comments on the motion. >> Madame Chair, >> Dr. Holes. >> Great. Uh Madame Chair, could the motion be repeated, please? Miss Bulman, could you please repeat the motion?
>> Um, the motion would be to add the option to extend the contract by six months of two times. And that's really just for flexibility because again, I wouldn't I don't want our expectation to be that it has to go over a year. But
seeing as what has happened this last time, it would it would just be for flexibility so that we have a little bit of wiggle room if we need more spa time, especially since we're going to workshop this in February. We're already another month out before we even start getting moving on the procurement process again.
>> Can I just >> understand? So, >> oh, sorry, Jeff. Excuse me. >> I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Do I still have the floor? >> You do. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. So, Madam Chair, um I I appreciate board member Bullman clarifying the motion. And so the motion
is um to extend the current one-year emergency contract possibly by two options that can be exercised at the end of the one-year emergency contract. Is that correct? >> Miss Bowman. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Great. So, um, my understanding, uh, regarding Miss Bulman's motion based upon her rational is that, uh, at the end of this one-year emergency contract, um, we we can have the option to exercise or not exercise the the two
six-month options, um, which would put us in a position should, for whatever reason, we don't have a solid uh, contract that's negotiated. um as we had expected even with the
prior RFQ then we have that option to continue. So it's not something that I believe we have to exercise but at least it exists um should in fact anything else occur where we need to exercise that. So I I am supportive of that uh
because the board has the option to to to exercise the options or not to exercise the options. So I think it just gives us that flexibility and considering what has happened in the past uh I think it would be it would be beneficial for us to support it. So
thank you board member Bulman for that option. >> Miss Jack Adams uh had something she wanted to add. >> I just wanted to make sure that everyone knew that any type of extension there would still need to be the existence of
an emergency um situation. So in other words, this wouldn't be like a a normal contract where you just give yourself the option. >> Um if the emergency did not exist, then this extension would not apply. I think that
>> Madam Chair better, >> Madam Chair, >> go ahead. >> Okay. So regarding um Miss Jack Adams um comments, um I guess I want to ask a direct question. We have before us a
one-year emergency contract. Board member Bulman put forward a motion to provide two additional six-mon options beyond one year. Can this legally be done for a one-year emergency contract
or it cannot? >> I believe that it can only because in section 2.01 01. Um there are provisions um A, B, and C that account for that emergency situation.
So I believe that it can I would like um um through the chair. I would like um Mr. uh Cooney to opine upon that. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. [clears throat] Jacqu Adams. Uh through the board uh excuse my voice here. um yes that that can absolutely be added to the condition
as long as it's tied back into the um exigent emergency circumstances. So as long as those circumstances still exist at the conclusion of the one-year period then would that would clear the way to extend it for at least the first of two potential six months extensions.
>> Madam Chair, may I finish? Okay. So at the end of the one year, should the vote should the board vote on these two six-month option? Um what would happen? What would be the
the right of the board at the end of the one year? Could the board come back and by majority vote indicates we're we're going to extend for another 6 month if the board so chooses or is there additional procedural requirement if
Miss Jack Adams could could weigh in? >> My suggestion would be um to have an extension providing that the emergency with exigent circumstances still exist. So if that did not exist, then the uh
contract would um um the contract would just naturally expire. But then if the emergencies um still exist, then you would have the option to go ahead and extend based upon that that circumstance. And then of course there are provisions that are already in there
um within 2.01 1 that allows you to terminate if you for example were to extend it for 6 months but then the um emergency exigent circumstances ceases to exist within that six-month period then you would have the option to go ahead and terminate.
>> Okay. And madam chair I do have comments uh after this motion is um um completed on the on the item itself. So if you could come back to me later I'd appreciate it. >> You're on the list Dr. Zean, >> thank you much, Chair. I really want to
kind of get this down to the bare uh necessities really of what the district uh uh is seeking in this contract, which is a group of human beings that understand how to get things done, who understand uh where we are in
the program, um and are very familiar with what we're doing. Under perfect circumstances, Dr. Heburn and his team are going to have a brand new shiny competitively awarded uh uh set of vendors or single vendor that are going to take over uh you know kind of the
critical contract role we play. We have a very very thin government staff for program management and construction management and for being the owner's rep. So we rely on the hundred or so people who work for uh acom or subcontractor to keep the the trains running. Uh we have a very very small
staff. Uh, in fact, we have one even smaller uh [cough] starting today. And so, you know, these people that are currently working are a kind of a derisking of what we're doing. And we spend a lot of time talking about Markham or about Coral Glades or about
critical projects. These people are already here and they're already working. Um, and so for better or for worse, this is the low-risk, lowerc cost option, you know, for what we've called plan C getting to this point. not a perfect solution, but it is the in my own opinion, it's the best solution for
right now. And I look forward, Dr. Heepern, to the accelerated and and really optimized path that you're creating uh on how we do solicitations in Broward County. Um it's something that the vendor community has asked for continuously in my three years uh on the board, and I'm glad that we're going to
be making best progress toward creating that uh under your leadership. Thank you, chair. >> Thank you. Any other comment on the motion? All right. All in favor of the motion say I. >> I. >> All oppose say no. No. Roll call.
>> Roll call on the motion. School board members. Aladeaf. >> No. >> Wman. >> Yes. >> Sea. >> No. >> Hixon. >> No. >> Honest. >> Yes. >> Leonardi. >> No.
>> Rupert. Roupert >> Thompson. >> No. >> Zean, >> no. >> 62 fails with uh Miss Rupert not voting. >> All right, we're back to the item. Miss Bulman, do you still have the floor?
>> Thank you. >> Um, okay. So, I think three hours ago when we were talking about this, Miss Hixon might have touched on this a little bit. Um, you know, we have a very specific amount of money that this contract is allotting. So, I'm I'm
wondering what is how did we come up with that amount and what are what are we expecting to accomplish in this year through this contractual amount that we're awarding
or you know that's being proposed right now. >> Yep. Thank you for the question. and have uh Miss Kohley um provide some information and >> uh thank you Sony Kohley. So the uh the roles were based on a uh 55.73
full-time equivalent which totals 17,000 hours approximately. Um, and what we hope to accomplish is to get to a point where we can have these projects completed. We do have some issues, but
uh to a point where we can get some of these projects closed out. >> Okay. I mean, I would besides besides the projects that we know are not going to probably be closed out like Rickards and a couple others, I would think that we are 100% trying to close all these
projects out this year. Um, and that that's our goal and taking hope kind of out of it. How are we going to accomplish this? I'm looking at the terms of the contract and, you know, I don't I don't really have a problem with it. What I would like asurances for
internally and to kind of understand is who on the schoolboard side is going to be enforcing this and making sure that our service provider is doing what they're supposed to do. I mean I you
know like we complain that we haven't things aren't going fast enough thing you know we're not getting what we're supposed to do but it we're under contract. So are is AECOM under a certain obligation to us in the
next year to deliver X amount of work or are we just paying them for hours and people can bill and be parked on a job and you know finding ways to bill a job? How what are what are we doing here?
Because our job is to make sure that the schools are getting the work done and that the kids are back in the schools in a better environment than when we started. So, I mean, that's that's my overarching concern. I don't have a lot of issues with the actual contract. I have an
issue with how are we enforcing that and what are really the expectations of the work product that we're going to have if after one year. >> Yeah. So, um thanks for the question. Miss Miss Kohley is actually our executive director over construction. She'll be the main person um that's
working with AECOM to ensure that they execute um and complete projects and provide myself and also the board updates as usual. Um and I don't know if you got anything else to add on that, Miss Coley. Um, I'll just add that some of the
things are outside of a comm's control, but we are addressing the issues and we plan to provide information to the board in terms of how we're going to move forward within this period. >> And when can we expect that plan?
because I would like to see I think that I think that it would benefit the board to have the plan um very soon to see so that we can follow what it is that's supposed to be happening instead of getting updates that things aren't going as fast as we
thought they were because you know we're just kicking the can down year after year. what how are we holding everybody accountable? So, can we get a plan and a schedule so that we can actually follow you know within the next few weeks or
how what kind of deliverable can we get so that we all are on the same page about what is supposed to be happening what did and didn't happen and who needs to be held accountable for that. >> Yeah. So, um great comments, great question. So, we utilize Atkins, I know,
to to um develop the schedule um just to know what should happen um in a within a certain amount of time. I know Miss Coley and her team, they meet on a weekly basis, if not more, just to make sure um timelines are are followed through on and if um like I said, some
some things are sometimes out of the control of of the program manager and also also the district and figuring out ways to make up um time. But, uh, if you want to add anything, Miss Coley, I know, uh, you guys work closely with Atkins and they're the ones that's kind of, um, during our schedules now and we can put something together to provide
some more frequent board briefings about where we are and probably add that to my weekly um, spotlight that I send out, too. So, we'll figure out a way to get it to the board in a more frequent uh, manner uh, with some of the projects and percentage of of closeouts or or
percentage of of close to completion. Okay. I'm I definitely want something that's very concrete so that we have the ability to follow it because right now we're kind of getting things peace meal and it's impossible for us to tell what's going on. I you know I wrote a um question about records and it's four
pages about why we can't get anything done. But that doesn't get anywhere and it's not coming to us to ask what are we going to do to get this done. It's just like, oh, we're we're having a problem with X, Y, and Z, and therefore we can't get anything done. So, I don't think that's
acceptable anymore. I think we need to be moving everything along. And so, the more of us that are engaged in that and the more that we know, the better >> collectively we can make sure that that's happening. And I, you know,
another thing is are we are you planning on h are are we bringing other people into the department to help her because I mean that's a lot of projects for her to be managing by herself. >> Yes. Uh so that's a discussion for this week. >> Okay. >> In light of everything that's going on.
Uh that's a discussion for this week to kind of solidify uh how how how we're going to operate um within that division uh moving forward. So, by next week, we should be able to have an update on what how we're going to be [clears throat] dealing with this department. >> And and uh Miss Co, correct me if I'm
wrong. Um um there is a schedule. At Akins has has a schedule, um for this for the the projects that we have in under construction right now. >> Correct. We do have a master schedule. >> Yeah. And so, um we'll work together offline to figure out what's the best
comprehensive um schedule that we can get to the board. And then as usual provide the update so at least there's uh something that you have a comprehensive schedule to know what should be complete by what time frame and then um the updates that
are often in my spotlight uh to compare and then we'll look at the spotlight too. we need to um as far as look at how we're reporting it. Like if we're saying this should be done by August 2026, you know, where are we as far as percentage of getting close to that, >> right? And if there's a delay, I think
we need to know that because we need to have a way to pay attention to what's going on because it's difficult when we don't know what any of the statuses are. >> Yeah, absolutely. And we can add that to the spotlight. So, I know we we we kind of do, but we'll look at how we're reporting out the spotlight and the information just to make sure it's
comprehensive and um informative to to help with with board decision- making in the future. >> Okay. Um so, I had I had just one other I had one other question um in 211D of this contract.
I see that I see that we're using um Trimble in the back on page 17. So, I was just wondering um who has the fax machine that's taking all these certificates of insurance. Is that really how we're
gathering information still? Are >> we okay? Please excuse me. Can you repeat that question >> uh in uh two >> uh page nine >> 2.11d? Yeah, page page nine. All
certificates of insurance have to be faxed to a through a fax machine. I was just wondering if that's really true. These look like our typical provisions with regards to insurance. And this language comes from the risk department itself.
>> So, um I I would say that it is valid, you know, cuz each contract has like different >> requirements. So, um >> Oh, the IRS and the bar public schools department are using fax machines still and then
>> Okay. Um and then my my last comment is um you know we've been advised by council that it's outside of our purview to get involved um with uh subcontractors and how this contract
is formed and what the what the compilation is. But you know I I appreciated Dr. Zeman's comments and I'm not unsympathetic to the current situation that we're in. And again, you know, I I just I hope and I cannot
express enough how important it is for us to get a proper procurement procedure moving forward so that we're not in this position again with a room full of Broward County service providers
that are very unhappy with us. So, I apologize. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mrs. Alhadaf. Thank you. So, I have some concerns in regards to a board member followup that
I received in in regards to, you know, I guess it's not directly for this contract, but it is in regards to the the RFQ and connecting that. So, ACOM is, and from
what I'm reading in this board member followup, they've never been penalized or had any fees withheld for failure to perform. And and so I cannot imagine that there was no there's been no failures, right? Because we wouldn't be in the situation
that that we're in with all the delays and and millions of dollars put into this program. And then it speaks to quarterly evaluations that was conducted by RSM and that the board could um you
know get these evaluations. So when I asked for them I I unfortunately couldn't they couldn't get them to me. You know this one's away on vacation can't reach that person. So it's it's very frustrating. Um there has to be
moving forward and from my understanding there's really no penalty provision currently right now in this contract. It has to be mandatory that we put in penalties to protect the district.
There has to be if there's failure to perform a consequence. I mean it's not this isn't rocket science. We have projects that need to be completed. There's been delay after
delay after delay. And so I'm looking forward to seeing these evaluations to see what's in it, right? Because it speaks to um non-compliance with standard operating
procedures, inaccuracies, and reporting may warrant the initiation of a correction action plan. Well, if we need to do correction action plans moving forward, then then we need to do that. So, there's some lowhanging fruit here.
You know, obviously this is an emergency, but Dr. Heer, moving forward, we need to put these penalties in place and there needs to be consequences and if there's failures to perform, then hold them accountable and and then there
needs to be fees withheld. So, I'd like to see us have a more aggressive plan to hold ACOM or whoever else is going to do this in the future accountable to get these projects done in a timely manner and stop wasting
taxpayer money. Thank you. >> Dr. Hoes. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, so, uh, I would like to comment on board member Bulman's, um, uh, suggestion of some form of progress monitoring, and I know
Dr. Hernand, you you you, uh, responded to that. Um, I don't believe we had any sort of uh, definitive time frame to which we will be updated. So, Dr. Heburn, did you have a sort of
consistent um update in terms of time frame in mind? for example, every 3 months uh as far as the progress monitoring of these uh projects in this one-year emergency contract and um is it
possible that the board knows um exactly what uh is intended to be accomplished in the one year and can the board be updated say um every 3 months or whatever the board
deems um necessary as to the progress of the um the the contract in terms of um projects that can be completed within the one year. >> Yes. I'll ask Miss uh Coley um and her team who's closest to the work, what's
the most feasible progress monitoring frequency? If it's monthly, if it's um every couple of months, uh where we give a comprehensive update based on the master schedule for this year under this current um emergency declaration
contract. >> Um considering this contract, I think monthly would be best. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, Dr. Heburn I is it possible that the board can be presented in say what you believe can be accomplished in
one year because even board member. So can this board be given sort of an idea of what is intended to be completed within that one-year emergency contract that we have here? and then from that
point update us every month as to the progress of the intended completed project for the one-year projects rather. >> Yes, we can we can do that. >> Okay. So, I have a few more questions. Um Dr. Hippurn, uh this is considered an
emergency agreement uh as a new contract, correct? Not an extension of a prior contract. >> Correct. Okay. And what is the level of participation of MWBE firms in this one-year contract? >> Uh Mr. White, if you can provide that
information, please. >> 45%. >> Okay. And what is the level of participation of uh local firms? Um I think that was 70 >> 72%. >> Okay. So, I know board member Zean had
made some comments uh regarding um uh the board's ability or right to um to sort of uh suggest or demand or um as far as inclusion of specific firms in a
contract. Um so general counsel is is the board violating any law if the board or individual board members should start to advocate suggest demand inclusion of specific firms in this contract with
ACOM >> through the chair in short no however this would be negotiation and so AECOM may say yes they may not say Yes. So, this literally would just be a
negotiation point that you would request. Um, and then if it if they accept it, then it goes in. If they don't accept it, then you don't have a contract as to that point.
>> Okay. So, uh, thank you, Miss Jack Adams. So with the contract that's presented before us um if ACOM fulfilled the board's requirement as Dr. Zean mentioned of the 45% for MWBE and whatever the percentage
is for local firms um does the board have a right to be involved in the in sort of the weeds of that type of negotiation or is the board right limited to ACOM fulfilling the
percentage requirement by the I wasn't clear as to your question. It seemed like it was the same question, but obviously it's different. So, if you can restate it so that I can understand clearly. >> Okay. So, Miss Jack Adams, the board
indicated a percentage uh requirement for MWBE firms as well as local firms. Um, beyond that, does the board have have any further right to direct um ACOM
into how they choose specific firms um or is the board limited to simply providing the percentage requirement and then ACOM can fulfill that through choices of their own >> the letter for what you said sir.
So in other words, you had mentioned >> um >> Okay, >> go ahead, Mr. Jack Adams. >> In other words, just to um elaborate on what you had said, you you you basically repeated what I had indicated a little
earlier in the meeting where you can make a request for a certain percentage participation. However, it is up to AECOM to determine who their subcontractors would be and interfering with that may be considered
interfering with their means and methods. So, >> correct. And that would not be within the uh board's right to do that. Is that correct? >> I would have advised against doing that
because that may lead to other issues within the contract. Like let's say for example um okay >> okay so in this contract it appears that ACOM has selected
um Bach Corodino and Gart as the firms that would fulfill the requirement of the board in terms of the 45% and the 72% um uh should it be um confirmed by this
board that these three local and minority firms will be utilized throughout the duration of the one-year emergency contract. Dr. Heburn. >> Yes. The current um staffing plan that's
uh attached to the contract. Those are the um firms that AECOM will be utilizing >> from our understanding. >> Dr. Burn would it be understand would it be possible that I could hear from the
ACOM from Mike um from ACOM that this is accurate for the record >> Mr. McIntyre >> Michael Minty AECOM through the chair. Uh our submission is for 45% MBE. Um the
contractual requirement was to 30% or greater. We maintained our previous percentage of 45 because we thought it was just the right thing to do. Um our local percentage is 72% um of of the proposal value. AECOM has
28%. >> Okay. So the question that I have is that in the contract it shows it shows uh GAR back and corino. Are these the three companies that will fulfill those percentage requirement throughout the
duration of the contract? And will these companies be utilized throughout the duration of the contract to fulfill that percentage? >> Um through the through the chair, yes, those are the three firms that are that are partnered with AECOM for this agreement. Um all three of them are
under contractual agreement with AECOM at this time and their percentages as laid out in the proposal are within their contract documents. So the commitment is solid for those percentages. they have they are guaranteed to work and they are
guaranteed to meet that percentage of the contract value. >> Okay. Thank you sir. So um my final comments madam chair is that any decision of this board today uh is about the best interest of our
students and our staff and uh Dr. Heern did mention the importance of continuity uh and how essential that is. We are in an emergency situation. I think time is of the essence and there's no time in my
opinion for learning curve or to restart this process. Um uh so I am um I would say thank you Dr. Heper for bringing this forward and um and I and I hope we
can move ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. Um, before we go to the second round, I'd like to make some comments. Um, first, was this a direct negotiation or a competitive solicitation?
>> Direct negotiation. >> Okay. So, I just want us to be clear. I I would like to again get some clarity from our council. in a direct negotiation, can we ask for any terms that we want?
>> So, um just to be accurate, this is a contract that is being entered into as a result of an emergency um um declaration by the superintendent. And yes uh to answer you directly in a an
agreement of that sort you can negotiate different provisions to be added into this agreement. Yes. So for instance we could ask them that we want the current team under the current contract
to continue. They don't have to agree but that's something that we can ask for. Correct. That's incorrect because now what you're asking for is directing them to select their subcontractors. So that's a
little different than asking for a provision requiring them to do something, for example, within a specific time period. That that would be like a requirement you would negotiate. But what you're asking is you're
dictating who they should hire to be their subcontractors. There's a there's a difference. So you used you used a word that I did not use, which was direct. So I I asked specifically, can we ask them that the
current team that is on the current contract continue? Not direct. Can we make that request? >> So, I would stay away from those types of requests because it goes into their
means and methods. Okay. I agree with Mrs. Alhadaf's recommendation to have penalties and consequences for failure to perform. This is something that this board has asked for for years now. Um to have benchmarks and and things like that. Um,
did we explore and I I believe I heard the answer to this before, but I just want to be clear. Did we explore other options other than uh a >> that's negative. U Madam Chair, >> did we hear from other firms offering uh
to do this work? >> Um yes, I think I received um uh an email from one specific company. >> Okay. Financially, how does this contract compare to the one we voted down last month or our previous contracts with AECOM? >> Um, as far as the rates, um, Miss Coley,
um, will you speak to the compariveness of the rates from the, uh, the RFQ that we rejected versus the rates now? And then, u possibly also the rates that we're currently paying. Uh the rates that we have now for this
extension are in um are comparative to the rates for year six. Um there were two increases um for staff. I can't recall which ones they were at the moment, but it is in comparison
comparable to the year six for a comp. Um who I'm not asking for names. I'm asking for positions participated in negotiating this. >> Um, executive director of procurement, um,
uh, director of construction, um, and, um, um, of course, um, assistant general counsel to ensure legality. And um if there's anybody else that I missed, I know those are the main um
parties um we started this. >> Are any of those individuals under uh investigation now? >> Um currently one. So I want to be clear. Um
my position on this item is not a position on any firm uh any of the subs. My feeling um
and I think we've heard this uh in previous meetings from some of my colleagues is that I do not feel confident in this process. Um, I'll leave it at that, Miss Hixon.
>> Thank you. Um, I have a couple questions and then I would like to make a motion based on a lot of things my colleagues have said. So, first, can I ask um, Miss Kohley, what based on Atkins schedule,
how many projects should be completed by the end of this emergency contract? We would have to provide a follow-up for that. I don't have that information readily available. >> Okay. Um well, I I need that in order to make my motion. So, if you could get
that report and share it with us in the next couple minutes. Um also, if I could ask um AECOM your last if Mike could come up and answer this question. In the next year,
what do you believe is a reasonable expectation of projects that will be completed under this this um contract? >> Mike McIntyre A through the chair. Um my recollection from looking at our
board earlier this morning is I would anticipate 85 projects um that are in or in the neighborhood of being able to close closing. Now there are there's there are two types of
closing a project. There's the end of construction where a project receives a 110 which means substantial completion building can be used right >> so the contractor in essence is done the project then lives for one year >> for warranty
>> that one-year warranty period where the architect does not receive final payment. So the project on the district's books in our books is not closed from one but one year past the date that we received
a 110 and that one-year period is when we we we obtained the 209. So those are the two steps. So it's a two-step closing pro process. We have we have an entire list of projects that have been on the verge of 110s that have
been stopped for various procedural reasons. um 21 projects are in legal limbo right now because of litigation whether it's an a contractor in litigation or an architect in litigation and a project I don't want to say comes to a stop but it
slows down then we have 42 or 43 projects that we have called we call them fire alarm projects where the projects were on final inspections literally final inspections fire alarm is the last inspection done before the
building inspection and the fire department said we need more devices installed. You've seen all those change orders over the time. The the dollar values are never huge huge dollar values. It's still money and it's important money,
but the time element on a minimum is eight months when that happens. So, we've been at 95% on projects on the verge on the verge of closing. When this final inspection said stop, you need to add 25 35 45 devices. We have projects
where we added 105 devices. There's an entire process now that has to go through. So, that's what has dragged a lot of these projects that are at 95 98%. We're getting over the hump on those fire alarm issues. We've gotten past the
process problems. We're we're doing the physical work. The contractor is doing the work and once it's done, we will have final inspections. So, I expect a huge block of projects somewhere in that 80 range to to hit closure. Then we have
a lot of projects that are in construction, meaningful construction at 20%. They're going to go past the the year. They were always scheduled to go past the year. We have other projects that are substantial in nature coming out of design going to
construction. They will go out to 27 because they're fairly large. Markham is one of those that's that's got substantial work. So there are a lot of projects that are on the verge. There are some projects that are going to sneak past the year and that there are
some that are just scheduled to go longer because they started late. They came out of design late. late determinations of what the scope would be. So, there's a mixed bag, but I'm anticipating looking at the board this morning and we update the board every day. It's a huge whiteboard that sits in
one of our offices on campus that is updated continually. >> It's there. It's open for the world to see because that's what we need to do. We need to have it and look at it and challenge it every day. So, we're anticipating somewhere in those 80 we're
comfortable with. We could get more if we can get over the hump on this on this FA issue and if we can get over the hump on the legal issues those that are in litigation. >> Okay. Thank you. So 80 projects and is that in correlation with the Atkins
schedule like do you work? >> Yes, more or less. So they >> we work on what's happening in the field and what it tells us. Atkins is working on let's a numbers play. How many can get done based on history.
>> Okay. >> So they're looking at historical data. We're looking at what is the contractor doing? What is the architect doing? Who's in litigation? What are the inspections doing? What are the inspections causing? So we're looking at day-to-day facts. >> Okay. >> And adjusting adjusting where projects
live in the schedule world based on that. >> Thank you. Thank you. Did we get the Atkins schedule yet? Do you have that answer? >> Miss Carpenter was leaving, but she turned around to get the information. So, give me a few moments and we'll get that for you.
>> Okay. Because it's going to be important for the motion that I want to make. So, um I'll go with what Mr. McIntyre has said right now and we'll go for that. So, I'd like to make a motion to add a 330 section, which would be the last section
of the contract, to call it the project completion agreement. And I would like that, and I don't I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know what the wording would be, but that AECOM agrees to complete 80
projects within the time limit of this contract or they will be assessed a late fee. And I don't know, my colleagues can weigh in on that or or you know, I don't I don't know all the pieces to this, but
I don't I'm not okay agreeing to this contract. And I believe my colleagues have all said the same thing here. So, I'm just making a motion based on that that we are uncomfortable without having something in this contract that holds them accountable to a timeline. And so
if there's a better way to do this, then you can tell me that. But I'd like to add that section in here and call it the project completion agreement. We heard that they think they can comfortably do 80 projects. So we'll base it on that for for right now and then have it
assessed as you already discussed every month where they are on that. And I know that things may come up that aren't they're not accountable for in terms of different things. So
I just think we need to to hold them to a number and to to be able to to assess some responsibility and accountability if they don't meet that number. >> Is there a second? >> Moved by Miss Hixon, seconded by Miss
Thompson. Public comment on the motion. Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. So, it gets very frustrating to be me because of course you're getting reports. They gener both both AECOM and
Atkins generate them every month. I don't know where they go from there. I used to get them. The facilities task force used to get them. They're now online. November is available. Um, I sent you a snippet from the November Atkins report showing that you had 100,
according to them, 113 projects in construction. There are absolutely schedules showing you the anticipated substantial completion and other dates. All of this is documented. None of this needs to be hearsay, people guessing, doing all of that. There there's no
reason there's no reason to be guessing or or second guessing and all of this. I don't know why you don't have Well, I do know why you don't have an answer because the joke running joke was I was the only person that was reading these things. The people running facility should be reading, but I do support the
motion. Thank you, Dodie. Keith um with Keith, you're looking at a $15 million contract here today. You don't have a work plan. You don't have a schedule. This is amazing that you don't table this for a week.
And I completely disagree with your council. I've contracted with this district and so many other districts that you absolutely can ask prime consultants to work with whatever folks and they've already have contractual relationships with people that they've
liked and have performed well. You can actually ask anything of them to add to a contract if they agree it moves forward. If they don't, you go to somebody else. So $15 million contract. There's no ramp down projected in here. If they're going to close 85 projects, where's the ramp down? Where's the staff
that gets decreased? The programs I've always been a part of have a ramp down. It should show in the staffing plan. As I finish 85 projects, some of those folks watching that work should go away. There's no ramp down in here at all.
This is not sufficient to approve today. >> Good afternoon, board members. This is Richard Forbes, director of P um P PMCM with EXP. Many of you know our team from years of partnership with you know existing projects with the school board of B
County. We actually have current projects. Right now we stand ready to support the school board with the execution of these projects. We have our experienced team leaders here. John Ceine he has done over 150 single point of entry projects on the smart delivered
in record time less than two years uh on the ESSA program with with Mark led by Mark Dorset completed over 400 with a team of eight you know worth over $95 million in less than two years. So this effort saved the district millions of
dollars through efficient accelerated delivery and so we remain ready and willing to deploy our services to help you. Thanks >> Darren Shanner Bach a subcontractor to the to AECOM.
I'd like to make two very simple points and first apologies to you because you're being asked to do something that is very treacherous. I would encourage you as you always do to take your council's opinion. The idea that you can
be asked to lobby try to negotiate for specific firms who do not have a legal right to get specific opportunities is treacherous. Not the least of which which firms do you lobby for? I agree with you. Broward is an amazing county, but which firms should you tell AECOM that they should hire? Which other
firms? What do what about the 10 other firms that are not included here? The other point that's also being missed here in regards to timing, it's the employees that I have there. When they are gone, let's say some other firm, the the gentleman who just spoke, kudos to
him. Let's say that they step in. Are they going to replace the dozens of employees that are here? because you have a hundred some odd people that need to actually do work and if we're taken out of the equation, you have an emergency situation. That's part of the
reason why we were negotiating because you wanted to continue this in the absence of a successful RFQ. >> Thank you, >> Michael McIntyre, AECOM through the chair. Um, we do submit quarterly staffing updates
as projects ramp down. This is >> stopping ramps down. Um, this proposal as submitted was submitted as requested. >> Mr. McIntyre, please speak to the motion. >> Oh, >> the motion is about >> the penalt Oh, on the penalty. >> Yeah. >> Yes.
>> Um, I understand your concerns regarding the penalty. It the details are what what are would we be responsible for? What would any PMO any owner's rep actually be responsible for? These are projects that are underway. We're
permitted late. The they're adding scope as the work's going on. Um the conditions that exist on these projects have existed. Um if we're not performing, meaning we're not doing the
things we should do contractually, we should be held accountable. Every firm should be held accountable for what they're contractually responsible for. I agree to that. Miss Bulman. Oh, sorry. On uh Miss Hixon's motion, I have first have Dr.
Zean. Thanks so much. Um I have a slightly different way to do that, and I'll come back to that uh later. Um but there's a kind of a structural problem with putting this in the contract. Two structural problems that I can tell you about right now. One, uh to the general counsel, can we revise the contract
today and still sign it today? Yes. >> Terrific. So there's that that structural problem doesn't exist today. Sometimes we get contracts already signed and uh we either approve them or we have to go back and renegotiate. So that's fine. I appreciate that. The second is that AECOM is the program
manager owners rep uh to the superintendent. Do they schedule inspections? Mr. Superintendent, >> do they schedule inspections? Do they I'm sorry. Do they schedule and perform inspections of the work that's been done in the field?
>> We have a a department um building department that does that. >> Do they write the changing fire alarm codes? >> No, they do not. >> Do they uh change other building codes that change in the field? >> No, they do not. >> Do they change the scope that sometimes comes in from left field in the middle of a project? >> Nope.
>> The problem is is that is that if we want to hold them accountable, we have to hold them for what they are responsible for. and a program manager, owner rep does a lot of great things, but they don't complete buildings. They don't even they they don't know what concrete looks like. They can put it on a spreadsheet, but they've never poured
it. So, so we have a problem if what we say is we want a com and team to complete projects when they don't do that. They really don't do that. They do no work in the field to my knowledge. I could ask you Mike about that, but I know that that's true. Uh they live on
whiteboards. They live in spreadsheets. They live in planning. They review documents. They try and get things done. They identify problems. They come up with solutions. They estimate cost uh overruns. They do change orders. They do time impact analysis. They do all the things that they're the kind of grease to try and get things done, but they
actually don't do any construction work. And so when you're under uh working at a peour and the construction company gets busy on another project and they take two weeks off, you just stand around staring at dirt for two weeks. there's nothing you can really do because the
contract is the contract and you hope they're doing the work but they're busy and they have to do a lot of different projects. So if we want to do the contract version we have to think about the things that the PMO is responsible for but it's not completing projects. Another way to do that is to ask our
staff to track there's 47 projects that have over a million dollars of work remaining to do. Those are the kind of the bigger issues. That's the Coral Glades, the Rickards, the Markhams, and and all the rest of the Northeast High School has some, North uh North Fork has
some over a million dollars. Those projects are the kind of the bulk of what the public and us should be really really concerned about and they should be concerned about it through the 110 through substantial completion. And if what we did is create what has been in the business for 25 years, which is a
single display updated weekly that shows here is a baseline January 2026, what's supposed to get done out of these projects that have a million dollars left by when? What's the scope, cost, and schedule? And then fix that baseline. And you do not ever change that baseline. And then every week it
gets updated and the public and us can see when all of a sudden there's a scope increase, a change order that increased the cost, a time delay for some set of reasons. And there's little bullets on the far right side that explain all of those things. That's what that's one way to kind of hold AECOM responsible for
what they do while also holding a general contractor responsible, holding the building department responsible for getting inspections done. There's just so many players in this business. And I didn't even go back to the design phase with all the architects and engineers who by the way screw up every once in a
while. They just do. And so what I would an alternate to the contract route trying to hold the PMO responsible for what they don't do would be to get this done again. We had this 25 years ago. But they're working on a whiteboard. Is
there is there a school board member that's ever been to their building to look at the whiteboard? Thank you. You've been everywhere, Miss Hixon. That's not a fair question, but but that's not a 2026 way of managing. That needs to be digitized. It needs to be put online. It needs to be public
facing. It needs to be on our website. And you lock a baseline in. You say, "That's it. Cost scope and schedule right now. 47 projects over a million dollars left over. Get it online by a specific date. Then every week the public and us can watch and see what gets done. That way when we come back to
these meetings and someone's big issue is records or it's Markhamm or it's Coral Glades or whatever they're they're tracking in one click in the middle of a meeting they can pop it up and they can see exactly what's happened. That is a it's so maddening to be in 2026 and to
think about Miss Alv saying we need penalties. We do need penalties, but first we have to get the data and we have to have the people on the far right that are responsible for delays or scope creep or uh or cost overruns for some reason. Um students and staff want to
get their their their buildings done, right? Like the kids at Coral Glades want the the the auditorium done. The the kids who should be in a permanent building of Rickards would really like a building someday that they can use for the whole campus. The public is demanding things as well. It's not just Miss Alad for penalties and and Miss
Hixon trying to get the contract right so that we can hold people accountable. We can only hold people accountable when we have that data available and everybody who's participating in it is held accountable. And it all comes down to three variables in this business. Cost, scope, schedule. So if you lock a baseline and you report any changes to
cost, scope, and schedule on a weekly basis, there's no more fibbon anymore. You don't need to get all the liars in one room to figure out who the problem is because it's on that dashboard. That is what Atkins and AECOM can produce for us. I think it's a way to kind of seal this contract in a slightly different
way, but it gives us far more than just a a a paragraph in a contract. Um it and and right now we'd have to get the prime to agree to that change in the contract. And I'm not sure we can do that at today's meeting, but we could demand
that our staff produce this display and we can then track everything we need to know about the big projects in Broward County and we can laser focus. And so to your question, Miss Hixon, on what's supposed to get done, well, this would show you what's supposed to be done in substantial completion in 6 months and
12 months and 18 months. And every district um uh schoolboard member can track what they want in their district. Countywide people can do it. the public gets to see it. And and one of the cool things about these systems is it puts an equal amount of pressure on everybody who's responsible in the causal chain.
And so if you're the architect and you can see yourself and your project on it, uh you're working hard because you don't want bad news to be out there. If you're the engineer, you know, if you're the initial designer, you know. So there's there's another way to do this that doesn't doesn't kind of like jam it into a contract because I don't think the
Peemore could be responsible for anything other than making sure the date is correct. Uh they just don't do any of the construction work. They don't do the inspections. They don't do the architecture work. They don't do the engineering work by and large, but they do all the staff work to kind of make things going. That's the only way. I'm
sorry, Mr. Superintendent. How many people do we have working in the construction line here excluding the department actual construction people who are either doing program management or construction management on your staff >> Miss Kohler? >> Uh three
>> three in a system where we've got 47 projects with over a million dollars worth of work left. There are three government employees supervising it. So all of that work, the critical digitbased work, the spreadsheet work, the scheduling work, all that is done being done between AECOM and their subs
and and Atkins. And one way to kind of get us to be able to see this stuff, which I think the public is really demanding. They're tired of being like, you know, with all due respect, whoever produced these these these uh spreadsheets, they're very very useful. But if I live in Margate and I want to
know whether my library is going to get done, it's really really hard to get there. Uh there are much better displays in 2026 that allow people to see what they care about and see exactly what they care about which always is cost scope and schedule uh broken down. So one way is through the contract. Another way is to force these displays. Uh but
these displays are commercially available. It takes these data which already exists and it just puts it up into a display that's easily consumed by uh by the public and by schoolboard members. Thanks, chair. >> Thank you, Miss Pulman. >> Okay. I I need a little clarification. I
I appreciate your comments. You know, I'm looking through I started out asking because we want accountability, I think, is the overarching uh message here. So, each of us has gone through it with some kind of a suggestion.
Um, and when I'm look, you know, I'm looking a little bit deeper in here. I there is there are staffing, right? Um, requirements in here. So, that's something that we're going to be looking at uh quarterly. And so, as we hopefully are winding down projects, we're going to have less staff and we're not going
to be billing and people aren't just sitting there putting their 40 hours in when they're not doing anything. I would expect. Um, but I guess the part that's missing here that I don't really understand and and I appreciate I think we absolutely have to
have that point of reference that we can see what's happening in real time with all the projects. Um, but there really is no meat and potatoes in here about what's expected to be done when. And I understand that there's delays and
things of that nature, but I don't at this point it's hard to tell what a what a default would be like in in CA unless you just fail to provide a couple of these deliverables or you don't you know give the staffing report every three months. Is that the only way that
you're in default under this contract? Um I just just looking for I think we're looking for a way to give to Miss Alv's point from earlier. like we want to give the public some confidence that we're on it
and that we're making sure that this is going forward as smoothly as possible. We can't afford to have this drag on and on and on and just be fed the same, you know, update but without any real results that we're seeing. How do we
add to this contract or you know put things something into place so that we have some guard rails so that we can have this um make sure that these projects are actually getting completed in a timely manner. So through the chair, I I think that
there are additional scope in here that's within the RFQ um that's referenced within here. Um because um the scope that you see in the body of the contract is not the only scope. Um the way that when you have a
contract that you try to um get the contractor to do certain things um is to add a a a deadline. Um but then um to Mr. Dr. Zean's point, you have to put a
deadline to something that's doable, you know. So within 25 days of the date of the effective date of the agreement, you shall provide me with this deliverable. Um, for example, so if there's something in particular with regards to certain
scope that's within here that you would like to see within a time certain or some other parameter, that's that's how we could accomplish that, right? Because so the RFQ from 2020 is referenced in the agreement, but we didn't we don't
have a copy of that. It's not >> part of the I mean I we don't have a copy of it in our um in this item. So when I'm looking at it, there's the contract and it we have the old contract which is the addendum contract, but it still doesn't have the RFQ. So that's so
there's no easy way for us to reference this right now as we're just sitting here. Um, and if we're referencing a 2020 RFQ, those are the projects that were in existence in 2020. Well, we're now in 2026. So if those projects are
still in existence, we're just again at the same issue, blah blah blah, you know, we're just trotting along dragging them along there. There's got to be a way that we can have some accountability
schedule-wise. >> So through the back years now, if Mr. Um Cooney has any ideas on this particular matter? >> Um [clears throat] I guess if we want to incorporate some additional terms as far as um potential ramifications of not performing timely
or like that uh of that nature uh in in alignment with what Dr. Zean said it's kind of hard to capture that based upon the the complexity and the level of um deliverables. Uh the contract and the RFQ language that talks about performance and evaluation doesn't have
any any penalties associated with it. Uh and what it really does comp contemplate would be um ultimately termination would be the penalty if you're unable to deliver the program. Um the obligations to continue um to provide the monthly
updates from internal staff and our three-month look ahead from AECOM is in the contract. [clears throat] Um but I don't I'm at a loss of how to add additional language that would refer to some sort of penalty provision. thing I think um you know if if the if
the ultimate penalty is termination because the board determines that they're not performing perhaps we would have to agree and maybe separately to a scope like a timeline or something that we would use internally
to determine how that how that's working that we would work with them schedulewise. is I don't I don't know if that's reasonable, but if we have a list of all of our projects and we you know take the top like Dr. Zeman said, we got 47
projects with over a million dollars left in them and we that's the lowhanging fruit or you know however we want to arrange it but then we're paying attention to that and we let AECOM so that they are fully aware of what our expectation is and then we
go from there. I mean, we have to be working with them to get this done, but it just can't be like, oh, we got it done or we didn't get it done and now it's 2026 and it was all on the RFQ in 2020. There's there's got to be a way here that we enforce. I mean, otherwise,
we're just a cap we're just captive with absolutely no recourse and and through the chair. Um, I would make a suggestion if I was clear as to the entirety of the scope of this
contract, but I don't know that as I sit here. So, if there are specific things that you would like to see within a specific time period, that can be articulated. But then what was pointed out by um Dr.
Zean, what are you articulating? What do you want within what period of time? What's the quantity, if you will? Um, >> I don't think we have that information in front of us right now to have an intelligent conversation about it.
>> So, maybe it's something that we would need to workshop. I there just I think I think the board collectively I mean I I think most of the everyone that's spoken wants to have some way to hold this construction program accountable so that
we get these projects done. I mean, this is this shouldn't be that difficult. >> Thank you. Oh, there's there's other people on I'm just saying you're on the list. >> Miss Thompson. >> Thank you, chair. Um, and I know we
currently have a motion on the floor and I hear my colleagues concerns about accountability and not having enough information. I personally feel like this item needs to be tabled and brought back with accountability measures put in um
with exact timelines as best as we can or to hold ACOM accountable, but we can't keep it. It seems to me that we're doing a lot of guesswork about what it would look like to be accountable without actually being able to
name it. So, I don't know if that would be a subsequent motion to table it or if I would have to wait till Miss Hixon's motion is passed, but that's what Adam to do. >> Um, um, one thing I would like, um, you all to consider is the, um, expiration
date of the existing contract. I'm not sure what that date is. I I want to say that it's January 17th of 2026. Um that should be a consideration um in light of the emergency that was declared
by the superintendent. >> Okay. Could you opine about whether Miss Thompson needs to make a substitute motion or if we need to dispose of Miss Hickson's motion? >> I I I will. Um, if if that is what if that is your pleasure, then there needs
to be a deadline to that that keeps in mind that the existing contract expires on January 17th. So, I would like to make a motion to table this item into a special schoolboard meeting on the 13th
before the workshop to include accountability measures, project deadlines, a complete list of every project that is needed to be done in order of how much is left. Like Dr. Zean
stated, there was about 47 projects of over a million dollars. And if any of my colleagues want to add details of what needs to be brought back, but this needs to be a comprehensive information given to the board so that we're not spending
three hours guessing about what accountability may or may not look like. >> Second. >> Second. >> Moved by Miss Thompson, seconded by Mrs. Aladdaf. >> Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Um, Mr. Sullivan, >> I just wanted to add if you're going to
do it on the 13th, then I would recommend after the workshop only because the students are first are scheduled first. So, I'm just concerned about >> That's fine. >> Okay. I just wanted to point that out. >> All right. Public comment on the substitute motion. >> Dr. Natalie Lynch Walsh, Plantation, Florida. So, the original RFQ was done
in 2020 with the removed board, and you may recall those Well, actually, none of you were here. Um, actually, no, I take that back. A couple of you were. So we had revolving executive directors of capital programs and currently you don't even have a facilities chief. However,
this would buy time to find out because there were accountability measures written into the RFQ. I don't believe they were ever followed and forced and if memory serves the evaluation tool may not have ever been brought back to the board by um possibly Sam Bay. So if you
look at section 6.5.2 two, it says PM evaluation because in addition to RSM doing the quarterly reports, which should be readily available, you if you may not be able to find something that staff never actually did. So 6.5 6.5.2
and 6.6 performance-based fees also in there. Don't know what ever happened to that concept, but that was written in to protect you guys from all of this. Michael McIntyre AOM uh through the chair. Is it possible to move the
contract forward and come back on the 13th for the amendment? If the amendment cannot be agreed upon, then you can always terminate for convenience at that time. Um >> that would not be my motion or anything I am comfortable with. But thank you for
the suggestion. >> Baron Channer Bach, I want to make two points. One which I think is is very relevant. You have currently and you've always had and in this extension this emergency agreement you have a termination for convenience clause. So the standards you use to exercise
accountability. You don't have to explain that to us. You literally can if if the board so decides can say you all are not performing whatever decision however it was made and you can terminate us. The other thing I would say is there are real people involved here. Now we can debate how many but the
number let's say it's a hundred people. Those hundred people, most of them, I and my partner, the ones that work for us, have spent weeks giving them comfort that they would at least have an understanding of what the circumstances are because if there's not an agreement, then it's questionable whether the next
day they have a job. And so you don't have to make your decision based on that. But I would encourage you to give consider consideration for that. The timing here and the emergency situation was established in order to avoid a circumstance of making a decision three days before the contract would be
terminated. >> Any other public comment on the substitute motion? Go ahead, Miss M. >> Cody Keith with Keith. Um, there are real people involved, my staff included. Um, I am absolutely in favor of a table. I started this many hours ago here today
telling you that Keith would stand up and sign this contract as a prime and I would get it done for you. Um, since that time, EXP has showed up here today and said they will step up and take this contract as an emergency and get it done for you and they've done some other work
for you in that capacity. Table this for a week. There's no reason to rush this tonight. If you're going to make an addendum, you're going to change it. Change it the way you want it. There should be accountability. There should be nobody should give you a list of all the reasons a school isn't done without a solution and a recommendation on how
to move it forward. When I hear board members said, "I got pages and pages of why this school isn't done." Real reasons, real reasons and real challenges and I've been part of them. So, my team's been part of them. What's the solution and how do you fix it and what's the plan and the timeline to get it done? If we don't do that as a team,
if a doesn't do that a team, they're not any good to you. If we don't find the solutions and we don't put them forward with no solution, table it. Take the time. Let your superintendent try to negotiate maybe with Keith or EXP in the same week. See what you got in third on the 13th. >> Thank you. Any other public comment?
Board member discussion on the substitute motion. Miss Hixon. >> Thank you. Um and I I agree with tableabling it. So, thank you for that. We were in the middle of the motion. And I didn't know how to do that because I
think it is very important that we add the accountability piece to it. And I we've said this a thousand times. It is not fair that someone comes to us and says it's an emergency. You have to make this decision today. It's a big
decision. is $15 million and we spent $123 million and the project's way past due when it was supposed to be without having these accountability measures in place. So, I agree with with postponing
it. I still want it to come back with a 330 section in the the contract that says project completion agreement and whatever that section looks like in terms of um what the what the scope is
or you know what we can hold them accountable but but I'm going to say this they are a project managing company. We're hiring them to manage the project. So all I keep hearing is why they can't do that. Well, we can't do it because of the if we don't at some point
hold them accountable, then they can keep pushing it off. But if you know you're going to be accountable and the contractor says, "Hey, I'm not going to be on this job for two weeks." It's going to make AECOM do something to either get a different contractor on there or to have a discussion and then
maybe AECOM charges them a fee for not getting it done on time. But to keep pushing it off and say this isn't aes job, I think that's not fair because they are managing the projects. We and this is the only way that we can do
that. Money tends to be a way to make people get things done. We haven't done it in the last seven years. I'm not willing to walk away from this contract without something that makes them as project managers make sure the projects
are getting done on time. And I I don't I don't agree with the fact that they can't control a lot of things because they can't but they can as was just mentioned be a problem solver on how to fix it. Whether it's coming to the board and saying listen light a fire under
your building department because they're or light a fire under your legal if that those are the things but to just keep saying it's not our fault. Um it's that that's how we're we've landed here and I'm not okay with that. I I think it
makes sense to wait and come back so that whatever we put in the contract is there, but not putting in the contract won't make them do it. I still would like what Dr. Zean said in having that. I think that piece is we should be doing anyway, but that doesn't hold anyone
accountable. It's just a list of things that should be getting done. When they're not getting done, we just sit here as a board complaining about it, but we are not doing anything to change it. and we need to do something to change it. We can't keep blaming everyone else. We've we've continued to
let it happen. I'm not willing to do that anymore. Thank you. >> Any other board discussion on the substitute motion? >> I have some. >> Madam Chair, my hand is up. >> Oh, go ahead, Dr. >> My time is ready. >> Go ahead, Dr. Holes.
>> I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Did you say I could go ahead? >> Yes. Go ahead. Okay, great. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Um, so I I appreciate uh the motion. I appreciate the concerns of accountability and I think accountability should be in place.
However, my concern is that time is of the essence and I believe as a board we could put that accountability in place today as opposed to delaying uh for another um seven or eight days. Um, I know board member Hixon made a a motion.
There were some concerns raised by Dr. Zean. Um, you know, I believe that we could still have that accountability in place today. Uh my suggestion which would be somewhat similar to board member Hixon and I may try to make a
substitute motion is that ACOM uh is accountable for completing uh at least seven projects each month when uh they update us on the progress and during that update um ACOM can indicate any
challenges that would delay um the completion of that number of projects monthly. Um, so Madame Chair, um, I I would like to hear the rest of the board members and then make a substitute motion. >> We already have a substitute motion on the floor, so we would have to dispose
of this. >> Oh, that's a substitute. Got it. No problem. So that would be my suggestion, Madam Chair, is that we hold ACOM accountable for an average of seven projects per month. and during their monthly updates, they indicate to us the challenges they're facing as to whether or not they they'll be able to meet that
um that average monthly uh over the 12-month period. >> Thank you. And before I move to Mrs. Aladef, um I was advised by council that we do need to specify a time in the substitute motion. Um as Mr. Silvin said, we have a a workshop with uh
students. So, the recommendation was to do it after um or after the students. Um I'm looking at the schedule. It says we're supposed to end at 4:30 that day. Um which I'm sure is optimistic. So, I don't know if any my the the
maker of the motion has a spec specific time in mind. >> I'm sorry, chair. Um there was a closed door that was added. So, now we're scheduled to end at 5:30 that day. So, I would recommend the start time at 5:30 for the special. Is that amendable to the maker of the
motion? >> Sorry, guys, but yes. >> Okay. All right. So, 5:30. Go ahead, Mrs. Alhadaf. >> Thank you. Thank you, Miss Sixon, for your remarks and thank you, Miss Thompson, for this motion. I will be supporting it. Uh, my comments are to
ACOM. I was very surprised that when you came up here that the number of completed projects throughout this time wouldn't have been 100%. You know, we are talking about $15 million. $15 million.
This is there's been extensive delays after delay after delay. And I just feel like I was hearing excuses why things are not getting done. It needs to get done because if it can't get done, Dr. Hepper, then you need to find someone
that can get it done. We need to stop wasting taxpayers money. Thank you, Mrs. Alhidef. Um, is there anyone else who would like to speak? Okay. I I have some questions that will
help me um vote on this motion. I want to go back. >> Oh. Go ahead, Miss Rupert. >> Um, thank No, I didn't really want to interrupt you. I'll I'll go after you. It's okay. >> Go ahead. Go ahead. >> Um,
I I joined in like about maybe 40 minutes or so ago, 30 minutes. Um, as soon as I possibly could, so I I've kind of been apprised of what's going on here. And, um, I I absolutely 100% am for tableabling it to a specific time
for next week. Um, I It it's enough of the whining that has gone on. Uh and I don't mean from our subcontractors. It it's it's enough already that that there have been excuses after excuses
and we need to make sure that there is nothing else but to get this done and um I don't really have much confidence um currently in in the um the AECOM solution. However, we're we're sort of um
kind of stuck and I don't think I want to be there. I don't think that that Broward County Schools should be there and I certainly don't think the students and the families that we represent uh want to be in in this position as well. Um
things need to dra drastically change. Um, I would support the amendment and I would um I would have supported the amendment, but I I will definitely support the motion from um Miss Thompson. I was uh trying to second it.
So, um definitely I do, but I did have a question that's not on the motion, so I don't know how you want to handle that. >> Go ahead, Mr. Robert. >> Um okay. Um I I missed the part. So, I know we were talking about um
subcontractors and and percentages and I had one question because I know that G and um C Cordino are still in in the the mix of things in this new proposed contract. Um, is the percentage for uh,
Kadino and for G the same amount that they had uh, in the contract that is going to run out January 17th or is it less? And if so, what percentage less?
You have that info. Info, Miss Colin. Uh, go ahead, Mr. McIntyre. Michael McIntyre, AECOM through the chair. Um, the proposal includes Curadino at 27%. Bach at 20 27% MBE and GR at 18% MBE and
the prime AECOM is at 28%. >> Thank you. >> 28% and this is for the proposal that's here today. >> Correct. That is those are the numbers from when we submitted our RFQ and our agreement carries past that RFQ that was
that procurement was cancelled. So contractually those are the numbers that we have. >> Okay. Um these were the numbers that were included um I'm sorry in the in the original um event. Uh nobody's been
reduced. Um G has always been at 18%. They were not higher. Cordino >> G was was lower and then higher than so they were lower at one point then they were higher. Uh they are lower now than
they were in the previous year six. Um Bach is higher than they were and Corino is slightly higher than they were each by just a few percentage points. >> Could you tell me how many percentage points G was?
I I believe G was at the last goround was 25% if I recall. >> 23 >> 23%. >> 23. At one point they were 18 then they went to 23 and now what's that number?
>> Now they're at 18. >> Okay. So they're they had a bump and now they've they've lost percentages for this one. Um, and what was AECOM's uh prime number for the
existing one and not and also the I I'm sorry, but my husband we switched off cars in my briefcase went with him. So, uh I'm sorry that um you know I have to ask you those questions here and I know it's it's annoying to my to other board members. I apologize. >> If you want Mr. McIntyre, I can I can
give you the numbers for the current contract and you can give them the numbers. Ecom was 25%. >> Okay. >> Um and and now we are we are 28% as the prime. >> Okay. >> Which is which is substantially below what I would call normal market for a
prime on a contract like this. >> Okay. I I don't really need an editorializing. Okay. >> I just need numbers >> and >> so I'm still waiting for for G >> and I G was was 1825. I believe G was
>> if I if I may, Mr. McIntyre, if I to have accurate numbers because >> Gar was 25. >> I have it in front of me. >> 23. >> Um Gu uh we're talking about the current contract we're in right now. 23% Gu Boach 20%. Um um SDA 5% um Keith
>> 10% >> 10% ACOM 22% Cordino 20%. And that's what we're currently in right now, not the emergency contract. So the um the ones that were uh omitted from from this uh which would be Keith
and also S Davis. Am I missing another company that was um omitted? >> No. >> Okay. Um however, GS did go down um to to you you all went I'm sorry 8 went
from 25 to 28. So, I'm assuming that some of the percentage came from GA and um >> No, that that the GR percentages went to Bark. That's how we we're able to maintain the 45.
>> Okay. So, they only had 27% and now they're what at Bach. >> Bach is 27 now. >> Okay. And what was it then? I'm sorry. 23 >> 22 20
>> Okay. Um so so the difference went uh into into uh Tibbach and um AECOM and uh GAT is at the lower range um than than they went before. So I know
that that's um and SWMVE. It's interesting that um even though you're keeping them, you reduce their percentage. Um what was the uh what was the factor in that?
We had a conversation um with Ivonne Garth um back during the RFQ stage uh where where she informed us that she was asked to be on all the teams and I told
her I appreciated her honesty upfront and that we were comfortable with that, but that because she was no longer committed to the team that that her numbers may go down and we allocate reallocated those numbers um ac across the MBE.
>> Okay. Um I I think I've heard enough to to um to vote. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um I'll withhold maybe comments for later, but I I got what I needed. >> Okay. Before we go to round two on this substitute motion, I would like to make
some comments and ask some questions. Um so I want to go back to we were told that um in a direct negotiation asking for uh the current team to continue would be a violation of
directing means and methods. I guess my question is is directing percentages for MWBE participation a violation of directing means and methods? No, because you're asking them for percentage participation, but you're not
directing them as to who to utilize. >> Okay. So, my purpose in asking the question about asking specific or asking for specific firms on to be on a team is not because I'm interested in doing that. Um, I actually have nothing I want
nothing to do with that. Um, I think that gets us into dangerous territory. But every other governmental entity I'm aware of is able to do that in a direct negotiation. So I say that all to say again I'm not
confident in this process and in the information we are getting and as some of my colleagues have have said in order to vote on a $15 million contract that I believe several of us don't want to even be in this position today. uh in order
to vote on that contract, I need to be confident in the process and in the information that we're receiving. So, um I hope that if this substitute motion passes uh to table this and and to get more information and and um add certain
things to the contract, um I I hope that we're able to resolve that. I feel I hope that I can have the confidence in this item next week. Mrs. Zahedf. >> Yes to Miss Thompson, the maker of the motion. So I have a recommendation um
yes to table this but to direct the superintendent to bring back the contract with negotiating with ACOM and any other company that can put something together and negotiate with the superintendent.
>> Miss Jack Adams. There is no prohibition to negotiating with whoever you believe can accomplish this. My only my only thought is to please keep in mind of the the deadline,
you know, when this contract expires because if you go beyond that date, is this truly an emergency? if you're negotiating next month with regards to this, is this truly an emergency? So, that's the only caveat that I would add is please keep in mind that this
contract expires, the existing contract expires January 17th. Um, so Miss Thompson, would you like to add that to your substitute motion? So I think there needs to be limitations that I would have to be like they would be able to meet this week or I don't
know if there's a way to to phrase that where it's like the people he that you are able to meet with in this week to get solicitations. I'm fine with that. I think that gives us broader scope. But the more important thing to me is the accountability measures and like a fine
if that's possible or something like that. So any negotiation would have to have a a very detailed definition of what accountab accountable measures are being taken, what projects will be completed, what our ramifications are because just ending a
contract gets us into the position that we are. That's not a good enough accountability measure in my opinion. Um, so if it's legal counsel says that's fine and if there's a way to limit it so it it still comes back on Tuesday at
five whenever it comes back >> then that's fine with >> I again >> okay um and just to before I go to Miss Hixon um staff is willing to move uh the two budget items on the workshop to a
future meeting um so if there is no objection to that we could do that and then start uh the special school board meeting for this item at 3:30. But if there is an objection to that, >> no objection. Okay. So, we'll move the two budget items to a different and then
move this to 3:30. Go ahead, Miss Hixon. I was going to make a different suggestion um just because start even starting it at 3:30 is I my suggestion is to make it as a special schoolboard meeting on a different day because we
have a lot of things crammed in there. I know we don't like meeting all the time but maybe doing it on Monday the 12th or Wednesday the 14th. I'd rather do it on the 12th so that we're closer, but this we've been at it for three hours now and to think that
we're going to just be done like that I I think is is not um a realistic expectation. So, if we did a noon meeting on the 12th as opposed to trying to squish it at the end of a of a workshop because our students and our
committee members, they deserve the time that they're going to get at the beginning and we're going to be anxious about hurrying everything up to get there. >> Mr. Sullivan. >> Uh, the only thing I would uh caution with the 12th I believe and um maybe Miss Jack Adams could opine. I would we
would have to if it's a special 48 hours before would be Thursday to post the item and I'm not sure staff would be able to accomplish um the item by Thursday. >> My schedule is 12. >> Yeah, >> I can't make the 12th. >> Yeah. >> Well, we could do the Wednesday. I mean,
I just >> Okay. And again, just to let the board know, Wednesday would be uh would give staff more time because the item wouldn't have to be posted until Monday. >> Is there an objection to moving it to Wednesday the 14th?
>> I could do at 12:00 p.m. or after >> 12 p.m. So, is there >> I need I need to be in Coral Springs at 3. So, I don't know how that works. >> Well, that's three hours. I think we can do it by >> Is there an objection to Wednesday the
14th at 12? >> How about can we do it at 10 or No, people can't do it though. >> No. >> Okay. Maker of the substitute motion. Oh, go ahead, Mr. Sea. >> If if I may, I'm just I'm just trying to
understand from scheduling purposes. Next uh next week when we have our workshop on the 13th, we're eliminating all of the budgetary all of the [clears throat] budgetary items. >> Not if we move the meeting to the for the special meeting of the 14th.
>> Okay. But um let me finish the thought if I can. On the 13th, the initial proposal was to remove the district budget update for the supplement and for the staffing allocation model. So
presumably if we stayed on schedule, we would be done by um 3:30. >> Then we have a closed door. >> The closed doors at 1:00, right? So we're taking two items out and
presumably will be done by 3:30. the the the could does the board really not think that if even if we get done by four that we're not going to be able to wrap this up in in two hours after speaking about this for 3 hours today that we need to
justify having another meeting on this. >> I prefer the Tuesday afternoon as well. >> I mean I I'll I'd rather crank it out on a Tuesday than than have to come back and on another I mean we need some finality on this. >> That's fine. That's fine.
>> I'm good for Tuesday. >> Okay. Uh, who is objecting to the Tuesday? >> One, two objections. Okay. Tuesday it is. Uh, Mythics, you still have the floor. I'm just going to say it's it's not
going to be enough time, but and and everyone who likes to vote no to extend the meeting will have to make sure they vote yes, >> which we will have to do soon. That's it for me. Any other board comment?
Dr. Zean, >> thank you. Um I just uh am trying to figure out how this board can get um kind of the critical information that it seeks. Um
you know if if we say to the staff by Friday we need to have uh contract mods. I think that's what the motion would generate, Miss Thompson, which is the staff would put together contract mod that would include some options for how to hold the peour accountable for what
the PMO does. I think it's absolutely critical that we get a clear definition of the work that a project manager owner rep does. Otherwise, this board can run the risk of saying, um, here's our uh our
whipping boy for not getting construction projects done, the project manager, when there are 8 to 10 major players that have to do things in a big causal chain to get things done. So I'm okay with this motion if in fact uh
part of the agreement is that there's some education to us about about exactly what functions a PMO does so that the accountability can be measured specifically to their functions. If that's not part of this motion, I think we're going down a rabbit hole that's
going to cause big big problems. Um we cannot blame people or hold people accountable for things for which they have no control. And the conversation that I've heard today isn't consistent with what I know AECOM has done, what I did as a chief economist in 2005.
You know, where you have teams of people that have to work heel to toe to get things done, but you can't hold team A responsible for what team F needs to do. And so, if we're going to include that as part of the staffing package, I think in less than an hour, we can say, great, they've got these four functions. Here's
four accountability measures for each of those functions. uh we can we can draft that and get it done. But if we keep, you know, imagining that the program managers actually finish projects, we're going to actually create like a potentially illegal contract where we
say to somebody, I know we hired you to make applesauce, but we're going to judge you whether the windows are clean. And and that's not fair to the the people, and it's not serving our students or our our community well. And so, we really need to have that information next week. So chair, how do
we make sure that the staffing package we get informs us enough that we can understand the functions of a PMOR and therefore uh get the appropriate accountability measures? >> I don't know. Uh do you have any proposals? >> I do, which uh which is just to make
that part of the motion and say, look, fine, let's let's have you come back and give accountability, but you're going to have to tell us what a PMO really does so that we can measure, you know, say they have four major functions. They do change orders. We need change orders done in less than 21 days. That's fine. We can hold them accountable to that.
They do time impact analysis. Okay, we need those in seven days. All right, great. You know, hold them accountable for that. Finishing a project involves so many different organizations, some government, some their contractors, some other contractors like Atkins. Atkins doesn't work for AECOM. So we have all
these like uh connections that make it very very difficult that if we don't understand exactly what the peour does, we're not going to be able to uh define how to hold them accountable and and literally we'll have the applesauce window cleaning kind of problem. And that's that's not being very helpful to
the community at all. So it I guess what I'm asking let me just asking a question to the superintendent. If this motion passes, Mr. Superintendent, would your staff bring functions of the peour and and options for how to hold them accountable for those functions? >> Yes. As you're
>> Thank you. I'm good. Thank you. >> Um before I go to Miss Hixon, I we do need to take a vote to extend the meeting, I will propose extending it 1 hour to 7 p.m. So, all in favor of extending the meeting to 7 p.m., say I. >> I. >> All oppose, say no.
>> No. Um, vote passes seven, no, eight to one with Miss Dr. Zean dissenting. Go ahead, Miss Hixon. >> Thank you. I just will be very brief. I don't think anyone's trying to hold AECOM accountable for things that they're not supposed to be accountable
for. When when I asked for it to be added, I said based on the scope that is in the RFQ. So I think we already gave direction to look at what is their scope in the RFQ and tie it together um to that and as um one of the public
speakers mentioned in the RFQ there is a section about evaluation and based on evaluation you could add the accountability piece into there. So I don't think that any of us are saying that if a contractor
doesn't doesn't do their job that AECOM is accountable for that. But they are managing the project. So they should have a way to be managing the contractors in terms of if there's a problem that they're either coming back to us with it or they're trying to hold
the contractors accountable. And that was the piece I was trying to say. I'm not in no I'm in no way trying to say a ecom, we want you to make applesauce, but you better make sure the windows are clean. So, that's not what we're trying to say here. And I I hope it was clear
that what I would like to see added in that contract is based on the scope of work that's in the RFQ. >> Thank you, >> Miss Thompson. I would just like to say I think it was crystal clear what accountability measures we were asking for and not holding people accountable for
applesauce. I would also like to point out we've been talking about tableabling the motion for an hour and we all assume that next Tuesday we will be able to discuss this in a timely fashion and so it made sense to go to Wednesday. But with that I would like to call the
question. Motion made to call the question by Miss Thompson, seconded by Mr. Seivera. All in favor of calling the question say I. >> I. >> All oppose say no. Motion passes unanimously. So on the motion to include
the accountability measures that Miss Hixon outlined uh and also to direct the superintendent to engage in direct negotiations with other firms. Uh and bring this back to a special school board meeting at 3:30 on Tuesday the
13th. Uh all in favor of that motion say I. >> I. >> All oppose say no. >> No. Do we need to do a roll call? >> Motion passes with Dr. Zean dissenting. All right, >> Madam Chair.
>> Yes, Dr. Holes. >> I'm a no >> and Dr. Holes dissenting. All right, that uh concludes that item. Um so we will address that on next week.
Um we are at the conclusion of our meeting. I do want to raise some issues um that have come up before we we end adjourn this meeting. Um I want to hear from my colleagues about
how we want to approach the chief auditor transition. Um so I don't know if anyone has any thoughts or feelings about that. Dr. Zean, >> I I think we learned a lot about our staff's capabilities to uh do uh really
solid search uh for key people. I will continuously compliment the amazing work that was done uh on finding the next general counsel and the whole process. Uh I know everybody wants to make the last 2% even better, but uh really really great work and I I think that um
we ought to go down that same path with our chief auditor. It's again a very specialized field and so we know kind of a pool of people that might be eligible uh to come to Broward and and take over that critical role. So I my recommendation is why not go with the proven performers that we have instead
of spending some money to have a search firm do it. >> Miss Hixon, >> that was exactly what I was going to say. So good job. Um, >> do we need an item to direct that to h to happen or can staff take that as direction that we
want to go ahead and advertise and do an internal search? >> Yes, we we'll take that as direction. Um, and Dr. Lozano and his team will get the ball rolling. >> Thank you. Um, another issue that I wanted to raise was the transition of
our COO. Um, I believe several of us have received concerns from our constituencies about the timeliness of that. Um, and I I just wanted to to put that out there to the superintendent. Um I'm sure my
colleagues will opine but um given all of the discussions today um and given the investigation um I do there is a sense of urgency around these
projects. Um I know that we want to move forward in a positive direction as quickly as possible. Um, and I was going to also bring up the need for some workshops on the capital program. Um, but I was pleased to hear that we will
be doing that. Um, are there any other might do any of my other colleagues have comments about any of those issues or anything additional? Dr. Zean, >> thanks chair. Um, did we agree to push off the budget from next workshop? >> Yes, we did. >> And when would that be rescheduled for?
Can we do that? The first uh workshop in February. Go ahead, Miss Sullivan. >> We're going to uh reschedule that for the February 17th meeting. >> So, I'm worried about that. Um you know,
um the referendum bonus issues, the amount of detail we need to spend on the budget and as a result of that is very high in my estimation and pushing that off a whole month uh means we miss kind of a whole cycle of this. I think there's a critical discussion about what
the board expects to know about budget items and we need to get that out as soon as possible. So that's just my I'm one of nine wanted. >> Yeah. So if I can if I can um add the two budget items is one is going over the supplements um which was asked to bring back about uh reviewing the
supplements and and recommendations about what to sunset um and reviewing job descriptions just to make sure if we do sunset there they're job descriptions are updated to absorb some of those. The other one is actually about the allocation model which we've discussed
um before um you know i.e. uh middle school has 400 kids, but we're using a model that says all middle schools get three assistant principles. So, we're going to discuss some of that um as far as allocation model of of how we move forward as a district to make sure we
are using our uh funding wisely and appropriately based on student population and not so much by specific level. um so that the board can understand what direction we want to move in and give us some recommendations um uh uh uh to how we move forward
because um before we push that out to schools and and they start working on their budgets in in um the the next couple of months. >> Terrific. I I I feel like a really clear need um to set some expectations about what information this board wants about every dollar that's spent in our budget.
And so I appreciate those two items. I think those are also important and I it's not my job to prioritize those things but I think my own recommendation is we do those topics the first workshop in February and the second workshop we set some expectations out of a board based on a briefing we get about what we
need to know to make sure that other people's money is spent in a way that we know where every dollar is being spent >> and and I believe we have to do that then on February 17th. So that's my proposal chair >> if I may sir. >> Yes. Um, so the I just consulted with uh
the deputy on her two items that are for February 3rd that can be moved to a different date. So with uh with that we can have those two uh budget items scheduled for >> and what were those two specific items? Just want to make sure the board >> one is Broward virtual franchise and non-traditional schools.
>> Okay. All right. We're going to move those. Yes. >> Thank you, chair. >> Any other comments or concerns? Miss Hixon, then Miss Rupert. Um so you asked a question about the um COO and the timeliness. So the s to the
superintendent as you mentioned there's an investigation going on. I don't think we should or could really do anything until that investigation is over because you're making assumptions of what will be found in that investigation without
knowing it. And like any other employee, we allow the process to go through before we do any final discipline on there. So I think that that's fair >> [snorts] >> um to do that. But can you tell us when you would be task assigning someone
because it is a huge position and as we mentioned earlier today very small >> yes >> department. So what is your plan on filling that space for? We'll let we'll let the board know um via memo uh tomorrow. We'll be deliberating to this evening and also um tomorrow about who's
the best fit and um if if any departments within the division may shift under under other chiefs um while we task assign for the the bulk of other uh departments within the division. So we're we're finalizing those decisions um um this evening and tomorrow morning.
>> So you'll have a memo to us sometime by tomorrow. Yes. Okay. Thank you, >> Miss Rupert. Um, thank you, Madam Chair. I I add wanted to ask a caveat for um information on the um the contracts uh
going forward that we're going to be receiving on Tuesday that we absolutely have every bit of information that we need by Friday at noon because it's very difficult to get something late Friday night and then you're you're over the weekend you're
doing it and then you you you have an opportunity to give that to the uh to our staff on Monday and then we're talking Tuesday. So, I I as one board member need to have that information so we can make a very uh positive move and
uh make sure that we have every bit of information that we need to make a um a concise and a an extremely important decision. >> U thank you for the comment Miss Rupert. I can uh the commitment from the staff as we were worked uh very diligently. Um
just uh a reminder that the negotiations are between two parties. So um uh we hope that uh ACOM works as diligently as our staff to get this um done as quick as possible so we can get this to the board at 12. And then um the direction
of of uh working with some other u vendors to bring those contracts um you know the same thing um working as diligently as possible with them and hopefully um they do in kind themselves uh so we can get that information to the board as quick as possible. >> Miss Jack Adams.
>> Um oh sorry >> I I do want to add that the officer general counsel will need some time to receive that and uh >> provide you with some feedback. >> Yes. A lot of moving parts. >> Yep. Yes. >> Okay. I I just want to be clear that um
if I don't have that information and the public doesn't have that information, I'm not going to be able to uh to support an item that we're just given um late into the weekend or on Monday. I don't think that's fair. Thanks,
>> Mr. Sea. >> Thank you, Chair. In regards to the COO issue, um I think it's probably safe to assume that everybody knows my position. Um, I am of the impression that the resignation should have been u immediately as opposed to this
April/June thing that we're now dealing with. Um, I'm uh happy to hear that the uh superintendent is is working apparently with staff this evening uh to determine an interim task assigned for that position. Um, Mr. Superintendent,
is uh the current COO uh going to be having any contact with this district uh in the interim in any way, shape, or form? >> Only with myself um and and key cabinet members for transition purposes to gather whatever info to make sure we
function as need be moving forward. >> Is she going to be involved in any decision- making processes involving this district? >> No, sir. other than the conversation she's going to have for you and the transition team, what specifically is her role, if any,
with this district between now and and April? >> Um, none really besides um the information that myself or any other cabinet may may need for transitioning. >> And is she going to be compensated during this transitionary period? >> Uh well, when we reassign people, they are compensated while they're reassigned
for investigative purposes. And do we have any idea what that compensation is going to entail between now and June when she resigns if the if the resignation stays as is? >> Um I'll have to provide a followup on that one. Sir, >> I would very much appreciate that. >> Thank you, Chair.
>> Miss Bulman. >> Uh thank you. Um thanks Mr. Zivera. You asked some of my questions. Um I uh you know in terms of the COO replacement and to Miss Leonard's point that there's
a sense of urgency around there. I mean I don't think that waiting to look is a good idea. I think we should be looking as soon as possible. Um just based on what's been represented to me that's a difficult position to fill. And also, you know,
looking at what the portfolio is going to be under people and how you're going to change that. Are you gonna >> are you are you going to when you task assign for next it tomorrow? >> Will that person have the portfolio that's currently assigned to the COO or
already going to change that? >> They may not have the current uh portfolio as far as all the departments in the division. Uh we're going to look at the unique skill sets of whoever we task assign and make sure um that if we need to shift departments within other divisions temporarily um so
we can so we can continue operations as a district and then I plan on um posting for a new COO um um soon. >> Okay. Like how soon how soon are we >> may possibly be this week. >> Okay. And I I think um you know keep please keep us in the loop. I think that
the board because of the importance of that position that um I mean I know personally that I would like to have as much information as possible about that. Um I know it's not a direct report to us but I think we would like some >> Yep.
>> the input on who is ultimately selected >> selected for uh overall or you're talking about selected for task assigned. >> Well selected for overall. >> Okay. Yes. Yes. Absolutely. We we we will. Yeah. I'll give you my opinion about the task assign if I have one. But um and I I are we just talking about
this one thing right now? >> Anything you want to bring up? >> Oh, so I I just um one thing that I had written down from our last meeting, we had talked about um the Broward Health sale and they had um I thought we were getting an LOI that was supposed to come
back today. So what's the status? >> Go ahead, Dr. Sullivan. >> We have um Sullivan, [laughter] >> not yet. Probably not ever. Um, we did over the break receive it. So, I just got to follow up um with what we did receive from them and we'll share that
with the board via memo tomorrow. >> Okay. And then would that be on our agenda? Like are you going to put that on the agenda for >> uh we're going to see if we can we know the board wants to act on that quickly to and see if we that could be an added item for the 21st. >> Okay, that sounds perfect. But we'll
we'll uh follow up with a memo tomorrow exactly what we receive from them over the break and the timeline of when uh for board action. >> Okay. And then I think um one other thing that we you know that's going to get kind of uh caught up in the fray
with the transition for the COO is something that we've been talking about that I think is really important is the master planner facilities planner. And I don't think that I mean that still needs to be >> Yes. Great. Great. um um topic. I actually um talking to procurement about
the the master planner just to make sure um we have no hiccups and all of that is still continuously u moving forward. So I'm in um uh communicating will continue to communicate with procure myself u just to make sure um nothing falls um during
>> what do you what do you say the timeline to be for that because >> for the master plan >> for the master planner let me follow up with you I don't want to give a timeline that's not accurate so let me u follow up with you after talking to to uh Miss Coley and uh Mr. White um to um
>> because that has to be an RFP. >> Yes. >> Okay. Yes. Yes. So, yeah, I I think that we as soon as possible that we can get that out then. >> Yes. I know they've already developed uh the majority of the scope, so it should be going out soon, but I want to confirm um where we are and what the timeline looks like. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> Any other board member comments? >> Madam Madame Chair, >> go ahead, Dr. Holes. >> Thank you so much. So, um Mr. Cera had asked, uh quite a few of the questions that I wanted to ask and I appreciate his questions. Um uh but I also want to
to ask some questions regarding the other individuals that are reassigned in in addition to the COO. I believe there are three other individuals, two purchasing agents. Um uh Dr. Hepern um uh is it four individuals that are reassigned?
>> Um three to three to four. Don't don't um quote me on that. Um I know two for sure, but I think it's um three to four. >> Okay. And are when being reassigned, are they working from home or
>> uh we reassign them temporarily to home right now until we can find locations where we probably can leverage um the skill sets of the uh other lower level um folks. >> Okay. And and while they're at home,
what will they be doing? >> Um great question. I have to follow follow up with you on that one. um you know some some cases we do um reassign folks at home just for the nature of the uh
investigation um and don't put them in a different role um just because of the nature of the investigation. So we'll have to uh follow up with y'all um oneonone just to um let you know some of the details of who's home, who's not, and and where are
they and what they're doing. >> Okay. So So Dr. have burn is there and I've I know this has been done before but is there any possibility that individuals who are assigned at home because we don't know what time frame this will involve that there is work
that they can do as opposed to the district just paying them to to sit at home. >> Uh yeah, I'm a firm believer that um people should be working for the money. So um we'll we'll have uh even if they're home, there are certain tasks we can have them complete. >> Okay. And and how long do you anticipate
this whole process will take? Because um I don't believe the board has an appetite to waste money. Um so uh can this be expedited in some form or way? What time frame do you anticipate? Because I am it doesn't sit well with me for individuals to sit at home and get
paid and um so the quicker this can be done, the better it is for the district. >> I'm I'm hoping um within a within a couple weeks to a few weeks. Um I've asked um HR to expedite this process but also maintain the integrity of the
investigative process at the same time so that we have reliable information to um react to. >> Okay. So when you say a couple of weeks to a few weeks does a few weeks mean beyond a month or do you anticipate >> it shouldn't be it shouldn't be beyond a month.
>> Great. Thank you sir. Appreciate it. Any other board member comment? All right. The scheduled order of business for this special school board meeting of the school board of Brower County, Florida has been completed. Seeing no
obligation, I now adjourn the meeting. >> [music]