##VIDEO ID:xVTENP2wz-U## the Schoolboard work session begins in 2 minutes please take your seats again the Schoolboard work session begins in 2 minutes the Schoolboard work session begins in 1 minute please take your seats again the Schoolboard work session begins in 1 minute e [Music] good morning everyone I now call the October 30th 2024 special administrative briefing and work session of the Maran County School Board to order at 901 a.m. please silence your electronic devices to avoid disturbing others mirroring and modeling how our students begin each day I ask that you please pause with us for a moment of silence would you please join me thank you I'll Now read our board commitment statement we are the Marian County School District leadership team when we come together to work we are efficient effective and productive our three most important characteristics are dedicated transparent and individually responsible to work well together we must demonstrate respect confront reality and be accountable we will always put students first and we will leave a legacy of success I'll now ask our Schoolboard attorney to explain the rules for this public work session good morning attorney Powers good morning thank you madam chair this work session is a public meeting is designed in Florida's Sunshine Law the board is dedicated to full transpar Arcy in its meetings and its work in compliance with the Sunshine Law the board has adopted uniform meeting procedures including the right for citizens to participate the board will allow public comment regarding any work session item listed on today's agenda at the appropriate time speakers must fill out a request form located in the lobby and hand it to the board clerk after the board and superintendent have completed their discussion on particular agenda item the board clerk will call the speaker's name in the order received each speaker will have three minutes as required by the Sunshine Law the board must maintain orderly conduct and proper decorum throughout this meeting speakers May criticize subject matter and decisions in a respectful manner but not people finally speakers must be very careful not to violate the Privacy rights of others especially students and their family members by mentioning their names or other identifying information thank you for your attention to these important rules thank you attorney Powers good morning Miss Martinez please provide the proof of publication for today's meeting good morning the notice for the October 30th 2024 work session was published in the Ocala Gazette on October 18th 2024 proof of publication has been attached to boarddocs under proof of publication thank you and we'll now begin the work session with the superintendent's administrative briefing good morning Dr gallet good morning Madam chair members of the board nice to see you I just want to take a moment to introduce um here with us today is attorney Daniel Blackman who is the staff attorney for our district and he's been uh leading the work with um facilitating input from from staff for today's meeting so just wanted to introduce and welcome him thank you great to have you good morning all right attorney power Shall We Begin we shall now um for our policy review today um there are a number of different types of policies which we have some are ones which were drafted or recommended by District staff um some required District staff to complete various sections uh of a proposed uh update uh there are ones that uh had specific legal updates the majority of these should be relatively routine and so in those items that are relatively routine board members are choosing to discuss the ones which they wish to edit um and and review we will proceed starting with the 1000s or the the zeros going through the bylaws and going up to 1000s 2000s each section these are posted on our board docs website so the access to anyone that's looking that's watching these at home however we do have one policy that we would like to take out order because I believe we have a public speaker specifically on that policy that policy is 9200 volunteers and it's um taking that order at the board chair's request okay so as to each of these um as we follow along on the screen uh my assistant Miss Brown will be uh making your edits in in real time here and uh putting those edits into the policy that will then be sent um for um formatting so if there's a formatting error those will not be able to be corrected today but all of the content if there's any content uh alterations or anything the board wishes to do uh then we'll do so one last reminder in some cases a policy may seem or a policy update may seem to be incomplete or there may be something more that you would wish to see in some of these uh in the past we've chosen to allow those to be defined by operations procedures as opposed to policies we have FL federal and state statutes and if you look at the beginning of each um of our amended policies or proposed policies you'll see that there is a list of the statutes that apply to that particular policy so what is within those particular items is what the policy is based on how we make that fit between the legal needs or the requirements and our action as a district is by two ways number one policy which is set by the board and then operations staff sets procedures to guide them in the actual implementation of the same so we're going to start with policy 92000 and that is uh on your document which all of you should have received the PDF document which contains of the uh graphs updates that is going to be bait stamped number anybody gets to it before I do 385 385 385 thank you okay this is the policy 92000 volunteers and uh I'll allow Mr Blackman to speak to the staff revisions to this what you see in green are the staff U suggested revisions that um attorney Blackman and staff have been working on this is what's been commonly known as the chaplain policy the policy overall speaks to volunteers um Florida legislature recently authorized changes um that allowed for School Chaplain and and codified that in law this is um the board policy which would permit that so I'll turn it over for discussion of board members Andor Mr Black Mr Blackman good morning is there anything that you want to share before the board discusses just an overview would be good the general idea because a committee met to go over and determine what sort of policy might be appropriate and the statute just requires that the uh School District create a policy to allow this program to go into place so the committee wanted to create more of a um kind of the the a minimum amount required to get it started not to get into the details since this is sort of a new area thought it might be best to be addressed by procedures as we kind of figure out how this program might be implemented so if you see that you might have a lot of questions about how one thing might be implemented or not that is likely going to be handled in procedures to give the flexibility as the program goes into effect thank you anything you wanted to add attorney Powers uh simply that the uh edits to our policy um are in compliance with Florida law and would allow allow for us to implement such a program and then as you know policy is like a aircraft carrier takes a long time to turn around because we have to set special sessions and everything to do that procedures are much more flexible so along the way if there was an item that we found that we wish to change within procedure that could be done and those procedures can be published as well um so with this particular policy uh this is new a new area of Florida law um very few districts have addressed this issue so here what we are going to be doing is to provide the framework within policy that would allow for if the board accepts it that would allow for us to implement a school chapy program okay thank you um before we call our speaker is there any um comment from the board at this time on this particular policy I mean I I think we'll have commentary but are we wanting to hear from our public speaker before we just wanted to give every opportunity and it's within the board's discretion since we have is it u m Martinez is it we have just the one public speaker yes within the board's discretion to limit the speaker to three minutes or five um we'll go ahead and give him the five minutes and we can go ahead and call him up Miss Martinez David Williamson thank you good morning and thank you for your your kindness in in hearing me speak before you get to the 9, thousands when you've got a lot of thousands to go um I'm good morning David Williamson um representing the central Florida free thought Community which is uh supports several counties around central Florida including several folks that are in Maran as well I also serve on the Interfaith Council of Central Florida's board of directors and the uh Central Florida Commission on religious freedom and I'm talking to you about this um uh three issues that I want to raise in this in this policy uh consideration you're making first this program simply isn't necessary during the school year students spend just 20% of their time on campus each week there's no need to reduce instructional time for something that's readily accessible in the community outside school out if students need social emotional or psychological support that's a real concern that we cannot ignore but that support won't be provided equally to all students by members of clergy it's like having pliers nearby when what you really need is a screwdriver to fix the problem counselors and psychologists are the tools already in your toolkit and they serve everyone equally well if you believe students need spiritual guidance I'd remind you this is not the role of our public schools and i' ask that you not conflate in your mind trained and certified professional chaplain with well-meaning clergy members from local congregations I think that's a point that's missed a lot in these conversations about why this is a good program and why it's not a good program is we're not talking about professional chaplain we're talking about members of clergy locally in general certainly there will be exceptions professional chaplain themselves have said they don't belong here and I'll leave you with a letter from 300 of them who oppose these programs the second issue is cost onboarding and managing chaplain takes time and money following up with applicants verifying documents background checks orientation administering a potentially dangerous program noticing requirements and website updates systems for initiating processing confirming student requests and parent permission the only thing free about this volunteer chaplain program is the volunteers and they bring with them a wide variety of talents to your campuses every day they can be amazing contributors to your mission as they invest in Student Success with you and there are members of clergy already volunteering on campus sometimes it's in your program sometimes it's in their own after school programs but members of clergy with access to students presents a substantial legal liability and that's my final point the legal concerns involved cannot be overstated the entire process rais concerns under the first and 14th amendments first applicants will have legitimate free exercise and equal treatment claims If you deny them the public will be watching and they'll be critical they could bring litigation challenging those you allow so you could be in court for people that you don't allow and people that you do allow staff will violate Establishment Clause rights of students the moment they suggest visiting the chaplain and I'll leave you with a document on why that's the case from the FL from the US Department of Education um policies and guidance on religious exercise and prayer in schools clergy will have never before tested privileges that will regularly challenge your program administrators and students most of all will have real concerns about the confidentiality of what they say to what will be a de facto School official so when you think about who's involved in managing your programs from the superintendent and staff all the way to that volunteer you are all agencies of government volunteers that are brought in and sanctioned by the school are school officials an untested law in conflict with The Establishment Clause doesn't undo Decades of case law which has repeatedly found that public schools cannot invite religious leaders onto campus to engage in religious activities with students even a well-crafted Chapin program cannot address all the issues that will arise for these reasons and more I urge you to oppose a chaplain program in Marian schools I thank you again for your time and I'll drop an email to you now so you'll have these documents that way you don't have to track public records on all this paper you can just use the digital ones that I'll send you and I'm happy to answer any questions now or in the future thank you thank you sir appreciate you coming by this morning that concludes our public speaker correct for today okay thank you all right um what would be the pleasure of the board at after we address this um it would be my preference to go back and start at the beginning because those of us that have been working through these I know I hadn't gotten to the 9000s yet I'm just going to admit it so we'll open up to the board for discussion comment who wants to lead us off are didn't you say you wanted to go back to the beginning no we're we're doing this one we're going to do one but then go back oh okay sorry okay I mean I I can start sure fine um I appreciate the comments I think that a lot of the comments are tied in the procedures that will be addressed by Dr G and her staff um my question to attorney powers or Blackman would be from a legislative perspective what is the obligation of the school board based on the law that has been created in the State of Florida exactly my question too I'll speak broadly and say the uh chaplain Pro uh chaplaincy programs as uh identified by new Florida law are an optional thing for districts obviously they are uh each district can create one or choose not to create one there's not an obligation required in statute that we do so however um if it is correct if it is uh created it must be within um guidelines that are done in such a way as to uh ensure that it doesn't it's not violative of law I think that um there's an entire you their entire Treatise is written on religious freedom in schools as well as um The Establishment Clause and why you know it where it can be violated in addition um there are a number of cases that are heard by the Supreme Court on a regular basis regarding those issues um however the carefully crafted U policy and procedures would serve simply to allow for chaplain as Florida law does um and then from the process of allowing for chaplain how the program is run and what structures and guidelines we have in place will be uh the important part so we're not required to have a chaplain program it's optional if we do have one then there are guidelines within we much fall Must Fall we have set those minimum guidelines Within this policy and staff's created I'll let attorney Blackman speak to that if he chooses to do so thank you attorney Powers attorney Blackman I have nothing to add at this point I agree with Mr Powers okay so I I guess for me um since I was one of the board members that asked for this to come forward what I would say is that I feel like what's been put into the edits and bring brought forth today is acceptable for me it is the Bare Bones of what is needed to develop um a program like this with the foundation being it is volunteer based and students parents are choosing for them to participate just like students participation um in a student L Ministry program like FCA or the new Jesus Club at Forest High School those are student-based decisions and a student being counseled by this individual on a campus would be with parent consent and I I believe in what our governor and I've said this before I believe in what our governor has has progressively pushed forward which is that parents have choice in the State of Florida we offer choice for a variety of different things I mean at this point you can take your family empowerment scholarship and go to a Catholic School um and so I think this is another opportunity for parents to execute their ability to choose what's best for their child and if a parent is not interested they will never ever ever have to participate in the program so that's that's kind of my thoughts thank you Bo member James any other thoughts from the board sure I'll I'll so I I concur with Dr James on on many of the points that she has stated and we have received numerous emails similar to what our public speaker has shared today so uh I have responded to each of them with the same thought process which predominantly will be addressed in procedure as this policy would give the opportunity to do so personally I believe and if we need to make the policy stronger so it says just the this I believe that parents need to opt in to this as opposed to making it an opportunity that a parent then has to approve I think if we as a school board create a policy that allows School Chaplain I I see all of the procedures to this in my mind certainly we would have lists by religious affiliation uh that parents would have the ability to opt into perhaps that's a Protestant and Catholic and Jewish and Islamic and etc etc um because there would there would need to be an optin that parents would be choosing for their student to participate in uh conversations with someone who would be certainly a volunteer but I don't know that it needs to be quite as open certainly the last couple of sentences here in this section on page 385 cover that the parent who wants their child to engage with a volunteer chaplain must provide written consent but I believe that opt in needs to happen even in advance of the school chaplain's um even being available I I guess um so I I'm not certain the timeline on that that certainly would fall on to attorney Blackman and and the procedures piece to this the one sentence that causes me a bit of concern and it's not that it causes me concern I just think that the two phrases joined by a contraction should be flipped and it's the last sentence in the very first paragraph in green that says all students are welcome to utilize a volunteer chaplain but no student may be required to do so I believe it should say no student may be required to utilize a volunteer chaplain but all students are welcome to because I feel like it changes the narrative it says that that no student is required and it it certainly gives that it makes that clearer separation in The Establishment Clause that I've certainly done enough research on myself U it gives enough clarification to that but it also gives the opportunity for students and families to make a choice saying that they are then welcome to to participate if that be the case uh the the procedures from that point I do know there is a local schol organization of more than a thousand chaplain that include our firefighter chaplain Our law enforcement chaplain uh I I know the individual who's training all of them certainly they are all open to this opportunity and have spoken with with some of them about that perhaps there is something that we would in procedure again take another Step Beyond saying that we would request any person who wishes to qualify for the school chapter program to be certified in something Beyond again that's a procedure that's not what we're trying to set forth here um mainly my detailing my thought process is to assure those in the community who may be listening to this that we are thinking this through and that the district team responsible if the board chooses to move forward the district team responsible for putting forth the procedures are not going to do it haphazardly and it won't be be available tomorrow it it would be something that will be very well thought out and we will cross all the teas and Dot all the eyes and ensure that families who want this as an available resource for their students can have it I can see as a parent the benefit of having a volunteer badge to say volunteer chaplain similar to knowing who your volunteer coaches are I it probably doesn't say volunteer coach but students know who they are and so just as you may not go to a volunteer reading pal to have basketball training you very well may go to your volunteer basketball coach to assist you in things that are related to that if students are aware and understand who the volunteer chaplain are it doesn't necessarily take extra time out of the school day certainly can be during lunchtime that these folks are around certainly can be during some of our high schools have Alpha time and just extra time on campus that students do have can be available for students during um other times and and again the student making the choice and the in tandem with their uh teacher and whomever supervision they're under at that time I I don't while I completely respect and understand the concerns that have been brought forth in the emails and in our public speaker today I believe wholeheartedly that there's still a way to make this work for students and families who wish to have this option for their students available on our campuses thank you board member Campbell really thoughtful comments um any other comments I just had a question about what she said if that's okay I agree I think switching that final line of the first paragraph and putting the no before the all I think is appropriate and I can get on board with that what do you mean when you say opin because I'm just trying to wrap my head around I mean obviously I know what opt-in means but I'm trying to understand maybe you're you're pretty good at articulating like a a sentence or phrase what are you thinking because I I don't necessarily see where it's needed so I'm trying to understand where you're coming from I don't know that it's necessarily needed again in policy it it very well may be the procedure that gets implemented after we okay put this into policy but I do see an opportunity that once the policy is put into place and we do vote on it if in fact we moving forward with this direction that perhaps it's a all statement to All Families we now have once we're ready because I mean this is going to take a process it it's not going to be an overnight process because first we're not going to go out seeking people to come join our chaplaincy program so that's number one it would need to be an opportunity for anyone in the and if we do have a requirement that they be a chapl a certified chaplain whatever that looks like then that's a whole separate step so potentially it's even the folks that are already in a certified capacity for law enforcement military chaplain those folks may even be the first ones that come in I I know that certainly you know chaplain essentially is assigned to some religious body of some kind but I I just I know that's not going to happen overnight but I think once we have our act together and know what that looks like then whether it's at the beginning of next year or the beginning of the next semester whatever that looks like that it is all families receive the communication and families if you're willing or interested in this being a resource for available for your student then you opt in so do you want to include then the fourth paragraph because I feel like what you're saying is is what you're saying in addition to the fourth paragraph which is talking about the principles informing shall inform parents of the availability uh and I'm that's not my last paragraph So no the fourth paragraph So in a school if a school has a volunteer chaplain available at their school the principal shall inform all parents of the availability of the services provided by the volunteer chaplain so is what you're saying in addition to this potentially but that and I had conversation with the legislator who was putting this through because some of the language and the actual legislation caused me concern because if you're considering we can't have a districtwide chaplain list hypothetically because if you are a chaplain that is in the forest you're probably not going to be available for a student in in dellan you're you're probably not so I I see this being again huge procedurally lots of processes have to be put in place I I would see a list available per school that would be evolving so I don't know that a principal maybe we either change that sentence or I don't know that it's going to be a principal's responsibility to tell every time we have a new chaplain on board if if inform is a word that I mean inform could be as simple as updating the school website with the chaplain list right and so if if informed can be defined legally as something as simple as an update to the list on the website then I think that it's fine because I we want to see an update when an update occurs but if a principle's information is simply updating the landing page and that quantifies as inform form then I because I um I feel like that paragraph is is stepping into procedure a little bit and I I want there to be some level of inform from the school and or the district but but I I'm not if I may go uh that line is directly from the statute and it's required as part of the policy must include that that's why that line is in there so but can we interpret the word inform to to be a lot of things inform could be a lot of things um the way at least that I read it and others could read it differently is once you have at least one chaplain available at a school parents need to be informed of the availability I don't think it necessarily has to be updated in new information every time a new chaplain's on the list now certainly in procedures we could do things differently but I think that would be probably the minimum bar that the statute's requiring okay that works for me so the minimum bar is that there is a list you have to have a list there is information right and that the principal shall inform which could be as simple as having a districtwide link of all chaplain available and what schools they're available at so uh if if a chaplain makes himself available to six or eight schools that's fine that districtwide list then could be simply a link on the district website that is include or L link to a district uh kept Central list um so there's plenty of ways to implement that those all as you said part of the procedural development so a committee would probably attorney P we already do for our regular volunteers correct they go in when they fill out their volunteer form they can select which schools right um that they want to participate at and so we really already have something in place for that we we do Vice chair Conrad we do and I I agree with that the only difference would be is that list of volunteers isn't public right agreed and so the idea then would be if you are signing up to be a volunteer chaplain for whatever schools you've chosen you agree to your name being public because that's the other piece to this that we again this is we're getting into the procedure piece of it and I I think that that's that's why our community is so concerned about all the nuances right we as a board our responsibility is if we choose to to put into policy what is now a state law option for us to do and then it's up to the team to deal with all the nuances of how the procedure how it will actually be implemented but as I said in the very opening statement that I made about this I understand the questions and concerns about The Establishment Clause I understand all of the years decades of Supreme Court law and precedent about this but I also believe there is an opportunity in the First Amendment for students to have the freedom to talk to whomever they want when they want about their faith and so if we provide opportunity for them to do so with people who actually are Scholars of potentially the religion that they're uh interested in knowing more about or whatever the conversation proceedes to be um then that we're providing him an opportunity that potentially is even more educational than this policy even Stakes at this point BL your comment um no I'm I'm just grateful for the conversation this morning because I think um there's a a lot of assumptions out in the public of what this looks like and so I'm just I'm happy that with the discussion we've highlighted this piece that it requires parent consent you you have to sign up for this for it to be an opportunity for your child and it's just one other thing one other opportunity to help our students with um the struggles and um the acceleration that we've had with issues in mental health and so this is just one other strategy available for our students and so thank I just thankful for the conversation this morning thank you Vice chair Conrad any other yeah I guess I guess I need to wait on this one might not Cummings um while I appreciate um this conversation I do have uh concerns with this um I understand it's a law I understand it's the optional law for us to take into consideration um by all looks is this is something that's going to come forward so if it's going to come forward my my concern is that um as a seminary trained clergy um that the and it's probably rolling into procedure as well um that we anybody can go online and take a hour course and become a chapl I have concern with that that's my biggest concern let's go ahead and let him talk can you pull the mic closer to you thank you sir that is one of my biggest concerns that you could have people that are coming into our schools that are volunteers that have gone on online and taken a hour course or 30 minute course and have gotten some type of certification saying that is that they are now a chaplain so my concern is that um who we are allowing to come in as a Chaplain um for me I I know what it took for me to become a seminary trained person um and it took more than an hour so um but I do understand that this is optional law I do understand that that this is probably going to happen in Marian County um we just need to make sure it's done right if we're going to implement it thank you board member Cummings and my apologies board member James I I I read your face now hold on just a minute and I just wanted to let him have a chance to finish this thought when really what you were saying is pull the mic closer to your faith so sorry about that um thank you board member Cummings um any other comment no I I just do think that Reverend Cummings points out a good point that when we're working on these procedures that maybe we ask him to step in there's things that you know I'm not aware of the training and um the lowend and the high end of what those certifications are and so we definitely want um to bring something forward um sure sorry go ahead I was going to say I I don't know that it would require a board member to to be that representative again I there is a a gentleman who is training and has um is over more than 1100 chaplain in our community that is very willing to help with training if that is something that we're interested in pursuing it's but that again is not our our purview uh I I believe that chaplain in general potentially is affiliated with a religious body of some sort and so perhaps it's that they are a chaplain representing a specific Congregation of some sort um again all of this is procedure and and I'm not certain that having a a board member be a part of that is is wise Dr D thank you um Bard I appreciate the conversation and here in lies the delineation of our core purpose is is our student right and student learning uh and I can tell you right now and if it's helpful to the board and whatever decision you make this morning with regard to what language you want in policy we will not be assessing um the qualifications for someone to be a chaplain we are going to take this procedurally in terms of volunteer because as you all said this is a parent choice it's up to the parent to decide from the list if they want to do that but it's it's a volunteer your base we are not going to be assessing their qualifications as a Chaplain and I don't know attorney Blackman if you want to weigh out on that sir the parents will also be informed before they can select an individual that these are not individuals that marrying County public schools has assessed and determined or have any can't speak to the the ability of the child it's a parent choice for their child and emphasize that we are merely going to be a meeting location and it's up for the parents to decide whom they want their child to speak to and I recognize the concerns of having certain qualifications but ultimately this is a decision where parental rights is going to be the driving force that's at least how the committee saw it and I'll speak to just what the committee said at their preference was as well and and if I could add on to the qualifications for clarity is about regard to becoming a volunteer with married County Public Schools right so there's consistency among um the processes for that but not above and beyond that to determine if they're an appropriate chaplain or not in terms of their their participation so it's a it's a volunteer I don't and and just to add to that there would be a background screen obviously which just so the public is clear that they would follow the same procedure as all volunteers would and they have to complete the level one background screen thank you I I'm just going to share that that that brings me um pause because um I do think if we're going to place someone on campus we do need to be aware of their qualifications and I I don't know what that looks like and I understand that that's procedural but when I think about the volunteer form that we have and what you go in and um you know there's there's a spot where you select what you're interested in doing and and what experience you you are interested in participating in I can see where we have uh a space where um a chaplain can select what certifications they may have maybe it's not our responsibility to chase them down um but I personally feel an obligation to make sure that whoever we are putting on on campus um solidly represents the position that they say they're going to take chair yes I just can we not U maybe Dr Campbell the resource that you have in the community I don't know who you're speaking about but potentially they may be even available to come tomorrow or later today or or could email you I think what we need to put into Reverend cumming's point we what we need to put in the policy is our expectations and if we put in the policy what our expectations are as to what a chaplain is defined as then we alleviate all of this heartburn I'm good with that and so we Define a chaplain in policy and then the volunteer does a volunteer application and someone in operations will have to check the qualifications to confirm that they are meeting the expectation per policy for what a chaplain is if I mean that's the workaround right if I may and certainly we can have suggestions um I see that as creating a I I understand the concern and I frankly agree with that concern whether I agree or not doesn't matter but the other factor is is that uh as a governmental body we do not want to be in the business of saying your religious con qualifications are or are not sufficient to we we are somehow checking you off or certifying that uh say a lay preacher versus a seminary train Tre teacher is going to be uh permissible as a Chaplain or that someone who is of a certain I mean certain denominations may not have any specific and respected you know Central Authority that issues any sort of credentialing it that that is part and parcel of why so many options so many um portions of creating a chaplaincy program or or procedures are difficult in the context of a school and that is because we as as to these are not these are again volunteers these are people who would uh I mean there could be there are a number of potential options there could be a a profile that uh people that the chaplain is able to create about him or her s so the parents can read and know more about that but as far as us giving the approval of their religious credentialing or not I see that as problematic and I see that as potentially exposing the board to liability if we say no we don't think that you are appropriate as a Chaplain or not based on what wouldn't that be for the the parents to ask it is and and research if we're really talking about parent choice that's what this is about and you know from the beginning I thought it was odd for a law to be optional because I feel like this then throws local school boards into conversations like this that are very difficult to tease out and stay on the right side of very established law and I'd like to get a little input from attorney powers on and also even from Dr gullet because of the the committee you know I as I sit here and listen we're talking about deep detailed implementation that is frankly a lot of work not for us but for for for others and and what we're asking them to do and what their level of comfortability is with doing that and then I would also like to ask attorney Powers um are there any other districts that have moved forward more quick than we have so far and and what are the Pratt Falls because you know sure I am all about having really great adults that have kids' best interests at heart and want to support them I'm for that all day long that's why I sit here but it's not that simple in this so attorney Powers uh well two things first of all at the beginning of this policy you'll see the struck through green writing no Pol no no um other district has moved as rapidly as we have on this policy we are as you would say maybe tip of the speaker we're the the we're the tip of the spear the Trailblazer so um this would be this would be um a this is unique and it's it's a new law and we are you know the the first in to my knowledge who is actively considering or moved to the process where we're actually uh discussing putting it into uh policy um now the that said there were some suggested form um sort of structures for a policy that were that were provided to us by niola and those were part of these that are uh strikethroughs here just as bits and pieces of language that were suggested as potentially meeting statute shoot um and you know staff reviewed this is these are are probably not the ones that staff and attorney Blackman and myself as well feel would best uh at our phase of doing this represent what the district should do moving forward because even if it is is compliant with Florida law we have to remember that Florida law uh that Pro permits and provides a basis of of this not I'm not trying to be funny but the devil is in the details as a phrase for a reason and we got a fire drill we're going to recess and we will return shortly yess at 9:46 [Music] a.m. I get scared e e e e e we're back on at 9:49 a.m. continuing our conversation on the School Chaplain um so picking up where we left off um what I was going to say is um that yes we definitely are Trailblazers in this particular policy and there are a number of reasons for that uh what I would also say is that our this policy is designed in such a way that it will essentially allow the board to permit such a program now prior to implementation of any such program a number of procedures have to be de developed during that procedural development it may become clear that staff has a request of the board to amend policy uh in such a way that meshes with procedures that they determine are necessary uh the passing of this as a policy um certainly the board is free to accept or reject when it is passed as policy if there is an amendment that needs to be made to the policy the amendment can be made um but that would have to occur after you know so we receive fo feedback from a procedural committee as to exactly how they wish to implement those procedures and I think that the board expressing its at least concerns right now is probably you know very appropriate in helping to further guide that process I don't know that we can successfully identify every potential um every potential problem every potential interaction that needs to happen in order to make this work what I can say is that this is a a core policy it's a by core I mean it is it is it simply allows for us to implement something that Florida law allows and the board has certainly uh the right to modify its own policy in any way possible the modifications the board chooses or decides on May shape or reflect um what type of procedural development is necessary to implement it and whether or not it can be implemented in a way that is uh that preserves parent rights uh preserves the parent right to choose and also protects the district legally so the procedural committee will have a lot of work to do I just I want to ask Dr Campbell a clarifying question Dr Campbell what is the organization that you're speaking about I don't know the title of the organization I I the gentleman that I'm speaking of is is the um chaplain of record at the world equestrian center and so I mean I don't know that I want to publicly say his name but he has trained and oversees more than what so what I'm just thinking is since this is a policy for Maran County Public Schools right it's not a policy for the state if Marian County public Maran County as a county has an organization that we are using to certify chaplains I think is what I'm understanding you say and I I think I would need to understand more about this me too but I I feel like why could we not in policy say volunteer chaplain who wish to participate in the chaplain program will be will be certified or whatever the word is by XYZ organization and will indicate which schools they're willing to work in and indicate their religious affiliation is if any and why do we why can we not afford then a this thirdparty organization that's in our County and the rest of the municipalities are using and the rest of the government organizations are using why can't we just say that they are going to be that's how we're going to Define our chaplain and then again it goes to parent choice if the parents don't want to participate they don't participate if I may just add a couple points is um if we start working and this is as Mr power said this is for the board to choose its policy I'll point out though that since we are as far as I can tell first going into this world of chaplain School Chaplain um policy that the more restrictions we put in place it's going to be difficult to nimbly address the concerns that we may not be able to to foresee and that may work and that may be something we can do in procedure I would say that might be the better way of handling it because there may be some unforeseen issue that may come up that we're not necessarily anticipating and we could have to come back to the board to adjust that and that could take time because policy updates happen every so often well and what I but what I respectfully what I heard Dr gullet say is that you all have no interest in in doing any of that so what I heard Dr gullet say 15 minutes ago was the opposite of what you just said so I guess I need clarification on because as a board member putting it into policy I am passionate about getting this through I need to un I need to believe that from a procedural perspective the procedure is going to Encompass some of the things that we want to see encapsulated and what I heard you say was it's just the volunteer and whoever gets to be on a volunteer list is on a volunteer list so is it not that so board what I'm concerned about is expecting our staff to work outside the scope of our work to become experts in qualifications for chap chaplaincy for credentials for roles that are outside of what our core work is and what our training is I I could never imagine our staff except on their own time to be experts in determining whether they're qualified to be a chaplain and I'm I'm very um open to how we guide this process but even to attorney Blackman's part the committee having conversations with principles and such there's concern about what this looks like um I think it's better in procedure and we can make this work but I just don't want to expect our employees to become experts in determining whether someone's qualified to be a chaplain I mean that would be like saying somebody's qualifying somebody to be a physician I mean that's our core work is education and that's outside of our scope and I I think it could be somewhat offensive too to somebody who to Reverend cumming's Point earlier who's he's he's talking about the the programs and the credentialing for for processes that are outside of what we do in public education I just don't want to put our staff in a difficult spot of now becoming experts in something that is not part of any of our training in any expectation of any job duty but it doesn't mean that we're not going to work through the process uh attorney Blackman's been very involved in this already we've had principles involved in the committee that's open to doing this and agree that the procedure we'll make it work but I I just want to be careful not to have anybody expect that now school public education District um employees are now expected to be experts and saying you're good enough and you're not because you took this class and you didn't there's no training that any of our staff have had in determining and being credentialed to evaluate to evaluate attorney Powers you spoke about this earlier evaluating whether that's good enough or not that's very uncomfortable ground for a public education official I think and doesn't mean we're not going to work through this and we already have already this is underway but there's a fine line with now you've expecting our public education officials to become the evaluators and that makes me very uncomfortable something that I wanted to share too is that you know we're here today to look at this policy which has been proposed where there is one change that board member Campbell brought forward that it sounded like we did have cons ensus on would you repeat that certainly and I have additional thoughts that we might want to address as well but the one that I believe we already reached consensus on is the final s sentence in the first paragraph we've made the change there so you can thank you it would Now read no student may be required to utilize the services of a volunteer chaplain but all students are welcome to do so perfect that was the change and and on top of that are there any other proposed changes for what we're looking at right now um because what I'm hearing is that this could be a conversation for the whole day and we have a lot of policies to to work through it's becoming very clear at least to me that there is a lot of procedural and implementation um aspects that needed that need to be worked through that need to be very thoughtfully done um because otherwise we're going to get mired in something in my opinion that is a no- win situation well and a point of our review here today is to ensure that each of our policies that you discuss we reach some consensus on what we want if we want uh so that we can then move on and and prepare them for public hearing and publication and all those items now as I was pointing out on a if you want to take it back to there Terry one of the proposals for a policy addresses two things uh a qualifications this this was a this was just a proposal that was that has been generated um that has under qualifications and it's got two checkboxes selection of a chaplain should reflect the expectations of the local community number one but then it's the two check boxes are one check boox would be if we chose that for purposes of this policy a chaplain may be in any person who the superintendent concludes can fulfill the responsibilities described in this policy which we just talked about is likely not something that is a superintendent's role nor is it something that the district wants to get into however speaking to board member cumming's concern as well uh and this is at least something that that that the board may choose to review alter Implement whatever it wishes to uh the second checkbox for purposes of this policy a chaplain shall be a person who obtains an ecclesiastical endorsement from their faith group certifying that such chaplain is number one a minister Rabbi priest Imam lay leader or similar functionary of the faith group qualified spiritually two qualified spiritually morally intellectually and emotionally to serve as a Chaplain for the board and three sensitive to religious pluralism and able to provide for the free exercise of religion by all students so that is this would then essentially put that back onto an ecclesiastical endorsement from their faith group now I do not doubt for a moment that someone who is of one particular Faith there may be extremely rigorous qualifications they need to meet in order to get such an endorsement uh another faith it may be exceptionally easy for nearly anyone to do so that but essentially at that point it is referring it back to um as an ecclesiastical endorsement from their faith group and that at least someone within that Faith group is better qualified to make that determination uh than um than than a school staff would and then so I understand and then it would be up to the the parent that's looking at this list to say okay you know this is ex religion that they say they are and it's okay with me I mean no or are we going to only have a list of rabbis priests imams you know lay leaders because we have to leave if we're going to do this we have to leave the door open to everyone everyone absolutely and then it'll be up to the parent to decide that it's fine with them you know to have um that particular particular person on our campus as long as they pass a background check CS I I have to say this um that's extremely dangerous extremely dangerous because you opening you're opening up the door to some um influences that are not conducive to education I'll say it that way um I understand the intent of this but I just also think that we're getting ready to open a Pandora's box with some of this that's how I feel and and that's not just based on on um my my beliefs as a faith leader but it's because I've seen certain things have happened in different where you open it up to we spoke we could possibly Expos our kids to a lot of things and yes it is the Parents Choice and I do believe in parents having the choice to side but um I am not comt it's a reason this is optional this is a reason this is optional here's here's my dilemma um again it's odd for a law to be optional usually then there's rule making that comes down from the State Board of Education you know for implementation how this is going to be done they are leaving this to Local School boards to lay themselves open wide board member C so my first comment was I appreciated the fact that the options of qualifications and responsibilities were already struck through before they came to us because I agree that none of that language needs to be in policy I believe currently the way this section of policy reads does still give the opportunity for in procedure for some of our concerns to be cleared up the question I have now since we already addressed one of the specifics of the question I had thank you for trying to stay on point certainly the the question I have now based on the entire dialogue we've had is this section of policy is placed within policy 9200 policy 9200 volunteers on the first page of this policy in the second paragraph p on uh 384 the second paragraph says the superintendent is responsible for recruiting community volunteers reviewing their capabilities and making appropriate placements so this school chaplain's piece is embedded it's not a separate policy altogether it's embedded within a volunteer policy M so if it is the intention of this board and at the recommendation from what I'm hearing that the superintendent is not necessarily saying we are going to be reviewing the capabilities of the people who are going to be applying to be chaplain and making those appropriate placements because essentially a volunteer is going to say where they want to go and even that the superintendent is not going to be responsible for recruiting the volunteers to be as chaplain I believe we as a board need to enshrine that in the school chaplain's piece of this policy to say that it is not the expectation that the superintendent recruit review the capabilities or if that's the intention of the board but my my further concern we've already addressed the one concern but my further concern is where this peace is in this policy and because the rest of the volunteer policy states that the superintendent's responsible for recruiting reviewing and making appropriate placements I believe that we need to also address those issues if we're moving forward with the school chaplain's piece which I think we need to move forward with let me say that but I believe we potentially need to amend it further well and if I may I in until we're starting to review this I was and I wasn't going to even bring this up but since we're diverting there I thought we were having a separate policy I did not think this was going to be embedded in volunteers and as we have historically said when when it says superintendent in a policy it's superintendent or her designate right that's that's what that means and so understanding that this I just want to clarify the superintendent is not recruiting every volunteer that comes from Maring County but I want to make sure that that's clear right it's it's her or her designate and so I I thought we I thought what was coming to us was a separate school chaplain's policy which could include clude a lot of the pieces of this volunteer policy but exclude pieces that are not appropriate and so I'm I was rather perplexed when I saw it included here um and I was going to kind of just go with it if that's what we were doing but it sounds like Dr Campbell and I seem to be in agreement that this should be its own policy outside of volunteers and Encompass a lot of the components that are included like retiree um volunteers and background screenings and the other components that are required for volunteers but also then can exclude pieces like the superintendent is going to recruit and yada Yad y so I don't I don't know exactly what that looks like but that was what I thought was happening so I I don't know if anyone else thought that but um Dr James to that point honestly we've received multiple Communications about the School Chaplain policy and so when I was reviewing them I was looking for the School Chaplain policy and I'm like okay I'm in the 9000s I've already gone through all these others where is it and the fact that it's embedded in the volunteer policy also was perplexing to me I don't know if that's how statute has required it to be done and perhaps that is that this is now like an element in statute that it's not a standalone it is a piece to the volunteer policy uh but I also was perplexed so let's get some clarification absolutely so it's not in statute but the initial um committee originally wanted to have a separate policy just as you are stating and then in time as as the committee met several times they decided to treat the um chaplain more like volunteers because there was discussion about what kind of level of screen and and all other questions which are more procedure related but they decided that it was best to put into the volunteer section because we want to treat them all similarly to other volunteers and that was going to make that clear there's nothing wrong with making it a separate policy there's nothing wrong with that that was the initial suggestion from the committee it's just in time they opted to go a different route but either way is absolutely appropriate and and there's I don't think there's just how do you want to conceive of this program is it conceived as a larger volunteer program where we treat them like volunteers then maybe it makes sense here if you want to treat them as something a little bit different than volunteers and and have different requirements and maybe it makes sense to put it somewhere else but either way I I think the staff would be comfortable and the committee be comfortable with either direction and and I can say I have no preference so certainly happy to have it separate if the board likes that well that's what I I would love to see volunteers semicolon School Chaplain and it be a separate policy whatever that looks like and it encompasses essentially what the volunteer policy encompasses and everything that was trying to be covered and delineates between the things that we're not looking to be a part of it like Dr Campbell brought up and I want to say I am I am comfortable proceeding with the policy that is written with the understanding that the procedures similar to other procedures will come before the board in a work session to discuss how how it's going to be brought out and ensure that the board is in consensus with how we want to proceed we just had a briefing on facility procurement and we decided we we were paying six figures to Outsource part of the planning to a affirm whose job it is to do planning and so so while I do not want to spend money on this project I know that there are volunteers in our community who lead organizations that are experts in this field that we could third party with procedurally to ensure that we are meeting the expectations that are that are that are encompassing the spirit of the board but the policy as presented to me I'm fine with all the language there I just think it should be a separate policy and not buried in this in this volunteer policy but I am more than happy to proceed with the understanding that we are going to button up the procedures before we implement the the poliy and and I agree um I also think that there's opportunity here for us as a board because other boards across the state are struggling with this that have the same pure intentions and want this to work but also don't want to have to fall into the pit and there's a very real more than a strong possibility that that's going to happen and so we hey for wared is forearmed and I think our legislators need to know that it's Our intention we want to do this we we want to do what's best for kids as all the time but but we need some guidance here we we need some rule making we need some backup because to just have it thrown to us to say oh okay you know you do this as as volunteers and it's up to you to make it up I don't know I I I feel like that that's twisting in the wind a little bit M chair I I'm the more I sit here the more I'm struggling with this um because it just I keep seeing different things I I'm just completely not for moving forward with this this is comings everybody else may feel differently my concern is because I've been in I've been do in Ministry for a very very long time and I've seen certain things that have happened what happens when we have a a chaplain that comes from this church or religious body that we know nothing about that's believes in um that believes in using illicit drugs and having origies and doing those types of things and that's something that we've opened our our schools up to our students up to we and we can't determine which religious body is is legit and which isn't because that's not our I think we're open again I'm going say it again we are opening ourselves up to something that is much bigger than we I think the majority of us up here are thinking Christian but there are a whole lot of other things out there that are not Christian and who's to say that they're wrong or right or whatever um I think we're opening ourselves up to something that's much much more dangerous than what we're looking at the surface at I just to expand on that I think adding a word may help clarify and so ultimately the parent has to give permission right the student's not just going to walk into the office but a word that I think is missing in the policy in the final paragraph of page 385 it says if a parent has authorized a volunteer chaplain to speak to their child the volunteer chaplain is authorized to provide individual spiritual um guidance and the parent before that it says the parent will be able to select a volunteer chaplain from a list of volunteer chaplain I think the word selected so if the in the final paragraph if a parent has authorized the selected volunteer chaplain um because the the parent is authorized there's going to be a list and let's say the list encompasses Islam to Christianity and everywhere in between the parent chooses chaplain chaplain X then the parent is authorizing their child to have conversation with chaplain X not with anyone on the list and I think there's just the absence because in the paragraph above it the second to last paragraph it says if they want their child to engage with volunteer chaplain which I think I should say a a volunteer chaplain the parent must provide written consent the parent will be able to select a volunteer chaplain from a list of volunteer chaplain available at their school if a parent has authorized this selected volunteer chaplain something like that and Dr Campbell you're good at that language stuff but do you get what I'm trying to say there the volunteer chaplain is authorized to provide individual spiritual guidance because ultimately yes I agree morally am I disalignment would be tolerable and and potentially shared with yes the likelihood that that is going to happen is slim but is a possibility ultimately though in the spirit of parent choice if that parent chooses that that individual to provide their child's spiritual guidance that is the parent choice I just want to ensure that in policy we are saying no other chaplain other than the selected chaplain the parent chose for instance if Pastor Tim wants to go be a chaplain at elementary X or Saddlewood you know I would want to choose that if my child was there right but maybe there would be other Chaplin on that list that I wouldn't choose and so I just think that adding if a parent has authorized this selected volunteer chaplain how about selected and authorized who's authorized how about when when a parent has selected and authorized a volunteer chaplain to speak to their child then the volunteer chaplain is authorized I I get where you're going but parent choice of what board member Cummings just subcribed on a school campus parents can make all kinds of choices but the kid don't have to agree the and that kid doesn't have to I'll also say this the superintendent must not be obligated to make use of volunteers whose abilities are not in accordance with District needs does a district need that I I think in the absence in in in the presence of the district not needing that there is a huge absence in the district needing other other guidance other spiritual guidance we are seeing just blasphemy and behaviors across our campuses and so if a parent wants their child to have spiritual guidance and they are choosing the individual that they want the spiritual guidance to come from we should allow parents the choice and opportunity to get that guidance no matter what which is what we would have to do correct so Madam chair and respectfully I I hear what Dr James is saying parents do have a choice they have a choice to take their kids to church on Sunday or Monday or Tuesday Wednesday Thursday why implement this through the school system why is it why is this burden being put on us as our goal is to educate kids that's a choice and parents still have their choice they can carry whatever Church they want to carry through seven days a week whatever religious body but it should not be entrenched in our educational decisions that's where I'm at with that um I hear it we're trying to make something fit we're trying to put a a square in a circle to to fit or accommodate certain things when parents never lost the choice never lost the ability to make a decision about how their kid lines up with the faith in in their faith but what happens when their kids that parents may be one way but as kids grow they they come to their own belief and they want to do something different who's going to stop what's but it's but the child has to seek it so the parent isn't it's not mandated counseling the child has to go seek the chaplain so the parent can authorize the chaplain speak to the child but if the child doesn't go seek the chaplain just like I mean what happens when the what happens when the the the parent say yes you can see this this chaplain but this other chaplain is on the campus visiting another student and this kid sees this chaplain that they line up with more agreement that we but we open that up we put that we allow that person to be on our campus okay so so the parent wants a certain chaplain to see their kid and the kid doesn't want to see that certain chaplain so now you've got an altercation in the hallway you know how is the principle going to deal with that you know again in its purest form I am all about it but but I am borderline resentful that we're not receiving more guidance you know again that's what the State Board of Education is for rule making you know and they're leaving it to us to figure out am I fine with going forward with you know what we're talking about today and and keep keep the conversation going yeah I can do that um can I ask about the edits I made then are we interested in that or not I just feel like it's parsing words but please go ahead well I agree with that when a parent has selected and authorized volunteer chaplain to speak to their child then the volunteer chaplain is authorized to provide individual spiritual guidance services to the student sure and just is the board in alignment with that change I see Dr Campbell shaking her head chair thrower yep Vice chair okay Reverend Cummings he disagrees with the entire policy so okay well I just wanted ultimately we're g to move forward and it will come to a vote at some point I think that vote at some point one of the things that I just want to say now is the policy and Dr Campbell has talked about this before the policy package just like other things come to us as one complete vote and not individual policies if it is possible if there are ones like this that we clearly are in dis disalignment with some of us are is it possible to pull certain policies to a discussion and they are vote them separately vote them separately because I want to respect that probably encompassing 99.9% of the policies we discussed today we're all going to probably be in pretty good alignment with but recog izing that there may be a varying vote on something like this and I want to recognize everyone's individual thoughts on that absolutely and and I I agree that as we continue to move through the rest of the day it's probably not going to take almost an hour and a half to do a policy yes but there's a lot of legs to this yes attorney Blackman is that possible to do that I wanted to add to a point that you made earlier just for clarification which is about what kind of guidance has the State of Florida given they haven't given us any Ru making there nothing a force of law that they have issued they have issued a model um um policy to consider the committee did consider that and did not want to use that policy for the similar reasons and discussions that we've had already here today but I just want to make sure that you were made aware that the has I'm aware of that and and because it's a it's an optional law there's not rule making so that allows a distancing and which I believe is unfair so uh board member James yes I think we're with the language then so when a parent has selected an authorized volunteer chaplain to speak to their child then the volunteer chaplain is authorized to provide individual because it's like an if then right something has happen with now it's a when then well it can is not needed in that sentence right so it's if a parent oh okay I apologize I'm sorry so do we want it to be when or are we okay with if I just think when indicates that step the the paragraph before has occurred and so that's why I was it seemed more sequential in nature that was why and applies something else happen first that's what I'm trying to get is like I know if probably does that too but when just seems in my brain to be a little bit more the previous step has to occur the written consent for selecting a volunteer from a list has to occur and then or when that occurs then the next thing happens because because if indicates well you know maybe they did maybe they didn't when means they did it and we have proof that's how when a parent has selected an authorized volunteer chaplain to speak to your CH to their child then the volunteer chaplain is authorized I I still think then is necessary no sure yes it isn't but that's okay it's if it's not necessary but if that's the word I mean I don't have to die on the hill but I just no it's fine we can put then then yeah it's a when then when then bibid Bobby boo all right it's now as to separation of this policy from others um I might suggest that we look at the section that is potentially objectionable at the beginning that you think should not apply to School Chaplain because we would have to replicate the majority of the policy that goes on after this one because it would still have to apply to volunteer chaplain for example that's the reason why it fits in the volunteer policy right CU they because they are volunteers number one but also there's application and background check there's duties Duty report knower suspected cases of child abuse Bandon or neglect confidential information legal protection removal of volunteers workers compensation coverage records all of those factors will will need to be duplicated for a new policy to set it aside if you wish to do that I would respectfully suggest that the simpler way to do it it would be to remove the objectional language that you see in uh the superintendent selection sentence because that would be altering one sentence instead of taking and recreating an policy which was otherwise a duplicate and just making that one stand out for chaplain any thoughts from Dr gullet or attorney Blackman on that that's the exact reason why the committee decided to end up combining it because the initial thought was you have one obviously if we have two and either one's fine but if you have two policies then you're going to have to just make sure you amend both of them whenever something changes going forward and the more we can simplify and keep things in one location the simpler it can be but it really is up to the board and we're comfortable and I agree I have I have no preference board whenever the board chooses could we not just say um put something that's like in absence of School Chaplain policy because like I feel like we have consistently been in agreement that the superintendent or her designate is responsible for recruiting community volunteers all of that language we've all been okay with to date and I don't I'm not aware of Dr gullet being uncomfortable with that language and so could we not just add a asct or maybe just a sentence at the end of the second period that says I don't know previous thought applicable to all volunteers except for I I want to I don't want to I do not want to remove the responsibility from the superintendent to do all of the work that has been there the line could be added I don't want want to try to tell the board what they what they should do but a requirement or a line could be added saying the requirements do not apply to the chap policy or these requirements just a simple line kind of like what you're suggesting would you please repeat that it could be a line put in there and saying these requirements do not apply to chaplain volunteers or to volunteer chaplain I think is the term we use these responsibilities I I think probably something along those lines essentially exactly what you're saying but these obligations obligations responsib would you like that sentence for drafting purposes would you like that sentence to appear after placements or after uh the next sentence that where where you'd like us to put it I mean if we put it at the end and just said these what's the four mentioned these four mentioned responsibilities and obligations do not apply to well because if you put it at the end of that paragraph that says the superintendent is responsible that paragraph also says that superintendent will develop procedures in accordance with his policy which must include but not be limited to requirement that each volunteer may be expected to assume responsibility we don't want to exempt that so um Madam chair may I Bard this is these are your policies but might I suggest you just reference please see this other policy for guidance on on that and and then you don't have to to do for and against it's just please see this other policy with regard to chaplain that's it then it's then it's separate policy it separates them and it's neutral so I believe that's advocating for creating a school volunteer chaplain volunteer school chapy policy that's 92001 so is that what you're saying I'm just saying if you're going to get into the Weeds on not the weeds if you're going to get into the intricacies of this policy then you could just reference that being very separate and if we referenced all all of the encompassing all of the components of 9200 in another policy then we are just saying we're only still changing the one policy which is the volunteer policy because then in a school chaplain's policy every we're not getting into all of the intricacies we're just saying see 9200 for all the specifications of what a volunteer is or the paragraph doesn't apply that's a good suggestion if you want they want to do that but the paragraph does yeah I know that's why it's complicated I think on the second paragraph a suggestion could be the issue that is that you didn't want to exempt would be the superintendent will develop procedures that could be a new paragraph So it's clear that it's a separate and you could add a line after the district needs saying that this paragraph alone will not apply for the chaplain um policy it's a suggestion but it does I think that's appropriate because volunteers are still expected to assume responsibility for health safety and Welfare please tell me where I'm look at how we're drafting it now he recommended splitting the first sentence off the first and second sentence off from the next paragraph okay and at the end of that those two sentences putting this paragraph shall not apply to School Chaplain to uh this uh volunteers School Chaplain uh no let's say to the volunteer School Chaplain policies to the the volunteers chap because we haven't even referenced them yet so you're actually referencing something that's not even been referenced yet because it's going to be in a in later on in the policy but that's fine this paragraph shall not apply to a volunteer school chapl I or to volunteer school chaplains doesn't matter plural get rid of a input chaplains no no oh I see sorry okay here we go that's I mean that's does that meet what Dr gullet was trying to if you if you would mind reading it I can't see it from here it would be helpful says the superintendent is it left the language that said the superintendent is responsible for recruiting community volunteers reviewing their capabilities and making appropriate placements the super tenant must not be obligated to make use of volunteers whose abilities are not in accordance with District needs this paragraph shall not apply to a volun to volunteer School Chaplain I'm a little un now in in that in that case I think even that second sentence should not be there the superintendent must not be obligated because then you're negating that sentence with that so we would have to um drop the sentence that says the superintendent must not be obligated no yeah cut that and put it put it after plac put that after placements right there you go yep and that's it y so that's not even a paragraph now it's like the the aforementioned statement shall not apply to a volunteer chap still in legal terms still a paragraph because it's a even though it's only a sentence so that could just be a sentence with the exception of volunteer School Chaplain the superintendent is responsible for recruiting yeah with that first with the exception of volunteer School Chaplain the superintendent is responsible EX yeah that's superintendent yep is responsible for recruiting and then get rid of this Mak volunteers reviewing the capabilities and making appropriate placements and then you don't need to separate those paragraph keep it all the way it was Back to the Future okay all right look good looks good to me looks good anything else are there any other uh suggestions changes or discussion regarding this particular policy I think my only additional comment and we'll leave this is just the irony of the entire conversation we are scrutinizing potentially a group of volunteers that have a title we're calling chaplain but we have not scrutinized any other credential of any other person on our campus that serves as a volunteer so we don't know those volunteers and what their World Views are coming on our campus and potentially mentoring or engaging with students at any given time reading to them whatever and so we are scrutinizing a group of people we are now classifying as chaplain but yet the district doesn't scrutinize any other group of volunteers at all we we never check clar we don't check bachelor's degrees we don't of any other volunteer so that that's the irony of the whole conversation but I I still conclude that I believe this is necessary uh I believe in the direction that the legislature is moving and the options that families continue to have outside of public education providing additional options for those families and their students that potentially do align more closely with their World Views potentially assist us in providing even greater opportunities for public education so I'm I'm G to leave it there I'm ready to move on any closing comments yeah just from me um so I I was just wanted to State I was very excited um about this policy coming forward and um excited for the opportunity for our students and have been involved in a lot of different pieces of um volunteers on our campuses and within the district but this to me presents a different challenge because when I think about the role of a chaplain on our campuses it is very close to and if I'm not mistaken was brought forward for the need um of our guidance counselors and and the role that they fill and so there's a very specific job that they are doing and our students would be going to this person for um specific encouragement um and so when I think about other opportunities to volunteer this is very unique in that way when I think about the work that The Rock does and and what they provide to our students you know they have their own volunteer orientation their expectations what that brings forward Dad's on duty right and so um you know in a classroom volunteer they have a school orientation and and those expectations are laid out and but they're under the supervision of a teacher and so even though we don't scrutinize other volunteers to me this position is very important it's very much needed but it's also unique and I think um as a parent if I was sending my if I had agreed to allow my student to see the Chaplin there would be an expectation of Excellence um in that area uh I would I would and maybe I shouldn't but I would assume that I would associate a chaplain with the level of my pastor at my church and so I think there's room to either clarify ify to our parents what that's going to look like and I know this is all procedural I'm just sharing my thoughts so that we present um an honest and clear picture to our families of what if they say yes what um that experience is going to be for their child and so I just think um again I'm 100% in uh this resource being available to our students and our families but it also comes with a level of responsibility at least to the this board member um of what we are we're supplying and what's available at our schools that's all I have thank you chair thank you Vice chair go ahead board member com this will be my final piece on this um yes this is a very very very unique um situation um and we may not have scrutinized others but um from my point of view my perspective this this has Eternal consequences Eternal so uh we have to be serious about what we're doing and we have to be uh on point we have other uh and my kids have participated there are other groups that come in that are faith-based uh The Good News Club that's for one that I could think of at Dr n Jones when my kids were there so it's not that we that I'm against anything but again this has Eternal consequences and and and and there are some just being real there are a whole lot of things out there that that we don't want to give our kids influences to um they they may they may end up getting that influence or getting encounters with it somewhere else but I don't think we have to bring it through the school system um uh so I understand where where my my colleagues are with this this situation this this optional uh policy I just I I want to challenge you to proceed with Extreme Caution because the first time there are religions out there that believe in suicide there are religions that believe in in in in and again elicit drugs and sex and all types of things so when we do this if we're going to do this I suggest we do it right so that we are protecting our kids I'm not the local guy up here on the board but I'm telling you what what's there and we're not there are there are religions we know we've heard we've seen on the news where whole denominations drank stuff and went went to went to meet rocket ship and all that kind of stuff we got to make sure that we're protecting our kids that's our responsibility education not faith-based um and if and and again parents still have the choice they want they they they're that entrenching about their kids faith we have Christian Schools we have musl school we have all types of schools they can send them to um and and and they have an option of even getting it paid by the state so we just need to proceive with Extreme Caution I'll say that again that will be my that that's going to be my stance all the way through this that we we proceed with Extreme Caution because the last thing I want to get is a email saying that one of our kids talk to someone and they did something that they shouldn't have did that their parents authorized for them to talk to to but it came through the school because even though the parents may have authorized it even though the parents gave them the choice no matter what it's going to say Mar County Public School Board first thank you thank you board member Cummings any other final comments yes just shall shall we change the policy from just saying volunteers to volunteers including School Chaplain or a way in which people would find the policy faster volunteers and School Chaplain would be my suggestion works for me works for me okay um and for M Campell I I chuckle because when you were veh that you were ready to move on I was like I don't think the rest of Bo's gonna be so that's kind of where that came from um but I I certainly um appreciate the the thoughtful words and and and the passion and the conversation this morning um what I'm walking away with is that you know we want parents to have choice and opportunity and with great choice comes great responsibility so I will leave that right there a great way to wrap it up thank you all right so that concludes our conversation on the volunteer chaplain policy and um if I you want me to MC from here yes we shall proceed from here and I believe we're going back to the beginning yes could we take like a f minute break please we shall take a 5 minute break it is we'll break at 10:41 thank you well I was going to e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e we're back on with our policies work session at 10:50 a.m. attorney Powers yes ma'am okay uh we're going to start with proceeding with the 000000 zos I don't know what to call those because they're not the thousands they're the zeros um but those are board bylaws what I'm going to do is the ones that we have identified for potential revision um in most cases after the bylaws you will see that only ones which have spe specified updates or recommended updates are are going to be or have been pulled and are in your manual there for discussion in some cases that is as simple as we change the copyright ear at the bottom of the page so that might be the only striketh through um however with the the bylaws there are a number of bylaws that are there which don't necessarily have any recommended update but it is within the board's perview to review and identify updates that it wishes to make at any time so uh we pulled those to make sure the board had the opportunity to do so so I'm going to go through each policy as we proceed through the day and I will just simply note the name so that we can check it off of our list of the policy and if anyone has any edit or suggestion or discussion or anything they wish to have on that particular policy just stop me when when I get to it so we're going to start at 01 31 legislative and policymaking 01 31.1 technical Corrections 01 31.2 variances and waivers 01414 student representative to the board chair is this how we're going to do this we're just going to blurt out the name chair whenever you get to a point that we want to is that the best way to yell at me call me whatever you want I don't know thing creative name so student representative to the board here's the one change that I recommend that is policy 01414 and page 13 and my book and whatever previous to that though are there any so far no for me anybody else no I have I have the next one okay okay so in this um I agree with the changes that have been made here because it will be able to allow staff to address in procedure how to best make this operate because we did put some stringent guidelines that uh have not been conducive necessarily to the way the team needs to work on it however there is one change I still recommend uh okay it's fine but can you see that better okay she's got her book I know yes so uh I'm trying to figure out how to determine how to tell you which sentence is it it is it's okay where those changes are and then it's the second sentence after that H the sentence Begins the representative the representative yes the representative will be invited to attend all I would say either here are my two suggestions either either all evening public Schoolboard meetings or all public Schoolboard meetings not conflicting with School attendance I believe we need to have that put in our policy because we have board meetings now at 7:30 in the morning or you know we have all the ones that happen whenever we're having to do the budget that are at really strange times and so I can go with either of those two recommendations if you want to either say all evening public school board meetings or all public schoolb meetings not conflicting with School attendance say the second second okay we've made the draft edit okay that's my recommendation on that one any other changes to that policy I'm glad you brought that up because that was one that I was looking at because we've had you know special meetings and things like that inside the school day yes yep good all right proceeding forward policy 0165 meetings um the virtual participation um the addition here can I ask where did this come from let's take a look here it's hard because I don't have the printed so I can't go back I don't know what the cover page says but unless I flip back and forth but law um the manual we have I'm just wondering I think there are instances in which a variety I I think I can reflect back and maybe all of us at one point in the last two years has participated for and so I'm just kind of wondering where these restrictions are coming from and and and trying to navigate and meet everyone's you mean as far as being a quorum no the entire addition the entire virtual participation is an addition I'm pulling that right now is at least how I'm reading this this was not previously in policy and we're adding it to policy it's new statute New statute I think they talked about it at our um ethics training yeah it was they talked the staring ethics okay so I I don't have I mean I don't have uh the revisions in policy this is a is this 0 165 our part of Neola is proactive review of current policy templates the revisions are intended to provide flexibility for members of the school board to attend meetings virtually under certain circumstances so okay that's that's where it came from so it's it's essentially what we were doing before was not encapsulated in policy I think that this was uh this was our first update since 2022 to this policy when it was initiated and so we're trying to ensure that as virtual meetings have become more um more uh normalized that uh if that were to be the case the Quorum requirement is still maintained but this allows for some sort of technical details that may have been problematic uh throughout that process in the past so the board has to decide whether it wants that virtual participation in there so the check boox you see next to Virtual participation that is means this entire thing is an optional update which also this allows for the virtual participation the board may choose not to allow for virtual participation however we do know that in some and that does not count for Quorum we do know that in some instances virtual participation we can anticipate may be convenient or necessary for members so long as we have a quorum and if that is the case these are the recommendations that should that become necessary we need to have it INR in policy so and of course you can edited to I I don't I don't necessarily see a necessity for edits I just I my question more stemmed from where it came from yeah and it's essentially how we've been operating yeah and I think which is a good thing yeah and I think we've done a good job of making sure that if we are going to have virtual participation we've talked through publicly okay who's going to be here or what that looks like so I think it's just going to change slightly um how the minutes are captured and so that will be something for Miss Martinez to work on because I I don't think historically the minutes have been captured with they do a roll call because there it says in here a roll call right which has not happened before virtually with when we have a virtual participant true um at Schoolboard meetings yes I don't know so that we do roll call at all during work sessions yeah but it's recording a vote the roll call is is mentioned when recording vote and I I see so I I just think that's and I I we don't often have virtual participation for meetings as much as it is a work session anyways but I do think that is a component that is different than how we have normally and correct me if I'm wrong Miss Martinas but the vote is just recorded as the vote it hasn't it hasn't been a roll call it hasn't delineated between this person voted virtually versus in person okay that's what I thought so that would just be a change that needs to occur if there's virtual participation chair yes like I don't know how to get your attention Okay that's okay um the the other thing that um that I am grateful that we will now have this enshrined in policy there are a couple of pieces if we go forward with this addition that occurred prior to our two board members that joined us in 2022 there are two pieces specifically that says a board member is responsible for making Advanced arrangements with the District administration as well as board members are not provided with technology to facilitate remote board attendance both of those things uh were challenges prior to both of you joining us with um some other board participation and now that we will have that enshrined in policy uh it will not be the district's responsibility to ensure that the technology Works uh if someone chooses to operate or or participate virtually so I I'm grateful that we are going to put this into policy because we did not have that previously so I'll just leave that there but those of us who are around in those days remember what was going on at that time well and it's good to have this updated because again you know we're a hurricane State you know things can happen and so it rarely um does this board ask any any board member to participate in a board meeting virtually which I'm certainly grateful for um you know as chair it's it's it makes it tough and it also makes it it's hard enough to participate virtually even in a work session yes so um just want to say I'm grateful to all of you for for coming participating and if you're not going to be here then you it's that's you haven't been and that's almost easier in a way um so all right well I'm ready to move on you ready to move on we all ready to move on yes okay okay go ahead sorry I just for my notes I wrote down I wrote down page numbers not policy numbers and so you saying policies doesn't help okay yeah we're always asking page what page I I can rattle off the page number when you get to the policy yes that has been your role so I appreciate you continuing to do that I'll do it that would just be helpful so I would to tell you to stop all right we had left off on and that was policy 01 65 uh 01 65.1 agendas is page 16 I yeah I'm good until page 25 I guess that 01 65.2 regular meeting 01 65.3 um special and emergency I I I have a question about uh 01 65.2 01 65.2 regular meeting page 18 the next to last sentence says every board member shall be notified of the change by letter can we change that to by written notice because by letter potentially insinuates that we're getting it in the mail but if we say by written notice it can be electronically text some other way good catch thank you we all good change made thank you 01653 special and emergency meetings page 19 01 65.4 recess page 21 01 65.5 adjourn page wait page 22 okay that concludes the uh bylaws we'll move into section 1000 Administration 1010 superintendent relationship page 2329 conflict of interest page 25 okay there's a green box on that that on what on page 25 24 yeah the end of 24 last paragraph there before is that what it is yeah that's that green checkbook check check box is we that is an option for us to select if CH if we choose to do so that's to replace what it's not replacing anything to be additive right but the statement isn't additive cuz shouldn't the whole statement be green if the statement no yeah oh so so so that's why I overlooked it because the whole thing is not green so I was assuming the addition was the brackets uh the no the the brackets are are a selectable choice so where there's a selectable Choice the selectable choice is the following paragraph so that's that paragraph the entire thing really should be in green because the recommendation is that that paragraph be added except it doesn't have an X beside it so right and I wouldn't say recommendation this is an option that is permitted and an option that was yeah it was it was provided as a as an option for us to consider and if we're going to consider such language that's their recommendation but traditionally when we are and sorry this is a little confusing that it wasn't all highlighted and whatever who's ever responsibility or the board docs challenges whatever we're having but traditionally whenever we have an option and we are selecting it then there's an X in those brackets and so if we move forward then that paragraph will be removed if we move forward we'd put an X in the bracket because with that if we want that paragraph normally what you would see is where staff has chosen the change okay they would also already put an X in that bracket staff did not choose to it would probably be inappropriate for staff to choose it because it's about the board about evaluation so it wouldn't really have been appropriate for staff to make a review as i r it it looks like this is what we already do um because we have our evaluations which are tied to the Strategic plan so and I would think that in any evaluation you it's just best practice to avoid subjective opinions so I'm fine with having it checked I agree yeah it's fine with me what I mean it says what we do yeah it's clarifying right okay good when they reflect what practice we already have in yes uh 1129 conflict of interest I just have that one pulled um I think what I'm seeing here is there was an addition of essentially adding board members to the existing language um but there's some optionals and there's some checkboxes and there's some other things in here that I think we need to have a discussion about um based on what I'm seeing um and so I guess I would start with the first optional language in the checkbox which is on the second page which yep right there however pursuant to Federal rules the school district has set standards for situations where the financial interest is not substantial or the gifts is when an employee officer agent or board member May accept a gift of unlisted item for nominal value value so I I I'm looking to attorney Powers I guess to indicate are we supposed to add a number there are we when are we supposed to check the box yes yeah we supposed to check the box if you want that phrase included and if you do want the phrase included complete the blank is there a procedure on point on this would be the question because it says we have standards for situations like this and I don't know that we school district has this policy number 1129 there's policies on gifts already passed by the board if that's the question I'm sorry there's policies already passed by the board that involves gifts right as to the nominal value uh gift was there a suggestion what's the gift policy it would be St weigh in on this do we want to check the box that's first question has set standards for situations when not the school board the school district has set standards for situations where the financial interest is not substantial or the gift is for when an employee officer agent or board member May accept a gift of an unsolicited item of nominal value um like I don't know a happy Teacher Apple mug comes to mind for purposes of this section nominal value means that that the gift has a monetary value of blank or less thought wasn't it $25 or less policy we talked about this we talked about because like tickets right if someone gives you tickets to a community event right but those are all outlined in in E ethics that are Beyond this specifics yes and this is that is also what we're speaking about right now is about board members and this is about all employees including board members right so I would say if we're going to put a maximum the maximum should reflect the maximum that board members are allowed to accept because we're we're adding board members to The Narrative which would be $50 but we have to we have to um disclose it so because we're part of this narrative most most employees will not be forced to disclose and so because they're they not similarly situated but in the instance where some where a a employee may receive a u gift of nominal value again the coffee mug the T-shirt the anything of that nature what amount is it that the district wants to see uh that we consider to be nominal nominal value uh obviously it doesn't trigger any kind of Ethics rules or anything like that but if you know if you said $10 that's probably too low because exactly or $5 exactly how much how many pencils is that that you know on the other hand uh if it is you know somebody can accept a Chick-fil-A gift card for 20 bucks okay if it's uh you know setting it at maybe $100 might be too high because that sort of encourages potential for for abuse um so there is a number that District staff may weigh in on as to what they want to have respectfully I just a if board member is included in the statement and our our maximum that we can accept as $50 then the number cannot exceed $50 because we are we are legally obligated not to exceed $50 right well right the the the provide the provision that you you would still this would not exempt you from the reporting requirements that you have through other sections I um but it wouldn't go ahead I understand that what I'm saying though is if our limit our threshold it doesn't matter whether we dis disclosing is is a must but it still can't be more than $50 so I don't know know how in any world the number could be higher than 50 right that would be my recommendation as to board members and since this policy applies equally to board members and everyone else you now have to determine whether $50 is appropriate or whether it is something less than that the first question that has to be addressed is this is optional language that currently does not have an X beside it so this paragraph is irrelevant unless we want to add it in yeah and so that's where I started was yeah is are we leaving it optional I'm good with optional and not including it is my point because board members do have specific ethical guidelines that we have to follow that the rest of the district doesn't superintendent does superintendent does I think attorneys do but to there there are other questions I have about lumping board members in with all the rest in okay so go go up to um the beginning here where board members are added um this policy because conflict of interest it speaks to employee officer agent arguably an officer would still be a Schoolboard member um but I think that this likely came from the fact that there's a need for clarity that board members also the conflict of interest policy should apply to board members as it applo to applies to employees you also have additional requirements but in this case um if you if you wish to weigh in on whether or not you want for board members to be specifically named within this policy you certainly this is an this is additive language so that's up to you there something here I I think my greatest question specifically about this is when you get to the bottom of kind of the narrative it talks about the disclosure and I guess my question is is the disclosure in reference to the entire paragraph or the not paragraph the entire policy or is the disclosure related just to right before because I I think that it's a little bit anyone can run for school board and if they're Ed by the PO the population of maring County they may very well have a conflict of interest and when they are then elected and have a conflict of interest what is then the disclosure or like is that paragraph at the bottom applicable to the entire paragraph and I don't I don't read it to be as such so that's why I'm asking these questions are you speaking about the very last paragraph in the entire policy I feel like that's the only time that disclosure is is really well unless I'm missing something sure it's actually the third paragraph from the bottom that starts speaking about yes um Pro must because these are my questions I don't know if my questions will align with yours but I have a couple of questions on this because in the third paragraph from the bottom it's specifically not just that the employee officer or board member must promptly disclose any potential conflict of interest but then it goes on to say upon discovery of any potential conflict of interest the district will disclose in writing the potential conflict of interest to the appropriate Federal agency or if applicable the pass through entity my question of that is are there state agencies that may not operate as pass through entities that we also would have to disclose information to if there is a potential conflict of interest that's question number one question number one the answer is that there is not anything that is specific that doesn't already appear in this policy however this policy is governed by code of f Federal relations 200 U so these changes that're they're these are legislative so when it applies to a federal award that's why those and that's why you see the language that is modifying each of those sections talks about Federal a federal Awards also no employee officer agent or board member and or administra administration of a contract supported by the federal award so where Federal awards are given that's one of those things that we that code effective regulations 200 does speak to so this should be in the policy and it should be things that are it's it's it's not particularly um useful to eliminate that because if you eliminated that it may add a layer of complexity because of the fact that you might also have other requirements by state agencies if they promulgate under a rule so far neither Neola nor I are aware of any uh of of any of the administ Florida administrative rule or Florida Administrative Code the FC's that have any bearing that is required as it was required under under federal law so that's why the section that begins with no employee officer agent or board member although that language can be altered the sentiment must remain because that's governed by code of fed Federal Regulations if you wanted to say officer agent employee fine you all technically in ways are employees you are officers you also act as agents um so the adding the continuing to have the word board member in there makes it so that it is clear to you that it does apply to you as well same thing a district will also promptly disclose whether in connection and that's the very last there second to last paragraph in connection with the federal award uh it has credible evidence of the commission of the violation of federal criminal law so if if the district became aware of such information the district is required to report that um to Federal authorities and I'm I'm understanding all of that I'm not I'm not questioning that my question is now that we have added board members to a policy that previously was not listed this the paragraphs you know the second and third paragraphs from the bottom now specifically talk about the district disclosing if a conflict of interest has occurred if it's based on a federal award I'm saying is there a need again now that we're adding board members to include the Florida Commission on ethics or anything to that extent because we are not just dealing with Federal Awards it's not just Title One grants that we're talking about I mean there are lots of other procurement things that we do that are not federal Awards so I I'm just I'm questioning if it's just federal agencies again that third to the last paragraph upon discovery of any potential conflict of interest the district will disclose in writing the potential conflict of interest to the appropriate Federal agency or if applicable pass through entity well the pass through entity isn't the state unless it's just a federal award are there any other instances where the disclosure should be required to State agencies that that's my question and then I have another question about this at the end but none that would be mandated by state law that are not not already addressed within Florida statute not every Florida statute makes it in our policy so I would say that this is in that policy specifically because of CFR 2000 because it speaks to federal law the board when it comes to things like the code of ethics or I mean I think you would be bound by the code of ethics to report a violation of the code of ethics or of a Florida administrative code um anyway I mean that's among lawyer regulations same thing if I find another lawyer has acted in an unethical manner or manner that's violated statute and speaks to his you know his or her bar qualifications um I have an obligation by the bar to make such a report so um I don't know that that that is something that I believe is optional for you to codify in policy though it certainly would be a good idea to answer your question as briefly as I can I don't know of any of any regulation that says You must include that in your policy however I believe that you would still be bound by it under code of ethics so okay and and I'll get to my last question and then we can go back to whatever I'm I'm saying on that my my last question deals with a very last sentence in this policy because again now that we're adding board members which changes this entirely I mean I I understand uh the justif if a behind it I certainly do because currently we haven't been listed and this is that you know this policy is repeated several times but now that we're adding board members it does say now employees officers agents and board members found to be in violation of this conflict of interest policy will be subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination pursuant to board policy discipline of administrative staff Andor state law adding board members to with having a discipline Ary cause disciplinary Clause causes a conundrum because this policy cannot provide discipline to any elected official so so pursuant to state law would I understand that's that's confusing but pursuant to state law would cover that because pursuant to state law they would not be subject to discipline by the uh by the district okay so if if that covers it so so pursuant to state law because elected officials are not included okay then I can get past that but it still takes me back to if there's a potential conflict of interest especially now that we have board members included in this the way it reads right now if we were to codify this in policy it only would be if we would report that the district would be required to report it only to a federal agency not be required to um report it to a state agency unless we alter the policy to say such yeah there are many reasons under which someone the the district may be required to report that agency those reasons may not be statutory they may also be based on Code of Ethics Florida Administrative Code or they could be based on contract the specific terms of a grant for example may include disclosure but again I think that in those situations if whether it were an employee or a board member if there was something that was a um any specific you know malfeasance that was occurring that it may be at that at that point I would say it's at the very least a judgment call and someone may be bound by the code of ethics however a rule code of professional conduct however when it comes to the the federal law federal law is the one that has a very specific requirement because of course federal law tends to overwrite for everything so that that was why we anticipate coming from federal chair now it's within your discretion to add any other types just be careful because you're going to cast a wide net too um if I if I could point to item C which is at the bottom of page 25 I think that I need clarification on this regarding for free use or for monetary use because I can think of 10 examples right now that are in violation of this policy if it is for paid use so it says no employee officer agent or board member shall make use of materials equipment or facilities of the district and private practice examples would be the use of facilities before during or after regular business hours for service to private practice or checking out of items from an instructional material Center for private practice I mean just as an example MC L uses our facilities to hold their practices and I know for a fact there are agents within MC within mcps who are also agents for mcfl based on what I'm reading here that is in violation of our board policy unless we are going to dictate paid for for free I I'm I'm just and it had not come up before now but I mean I know that there are there are individuals who who work for other have other jobs and they rent this own Auditorium to hold dance performances twice a year are they not allowed to do that because it's happening all of the time and I'm I'm just trying to figure it out sure the next sentence at the beginning of paragraph 26 does indicate that exceptions to any provisions in part A through C of this policy shall be approved in advance by the superintendent and shall be consistent with state law so there is a little bit of a modification there that I think would capture though I don't know to what degree those well and where are those expectations defined well and the the in in B part of it is in B because it's not just Private Practice it's private practice of their profession and so private lessons or services for a fee so mcfl is like they're paying to do that but there's also an arrangement with each of those different schools where they're practicing there's a so I mean again that falls under this last statement that attorney Powers just said but essentially if you're using your work laptop to provide tutoring services for a student off hours that's not appropriate I I yes 100% I understand the intention I think that due to the vagueness there's a lot of instances where it's occurring and it's not very clear that it's an exception if I could add something I'd say that no employee officer board member individuals cannot profit from this the district certainly can make arrangements and can loan out facilities rent out facilities and we have those uh procedures and policies as well so I think that's maybe the confli so an individual could not take the football stadium and rent it out and make money off of it but the district certainly could but well I don't know but see and so like I don't I don't I don't technically agree with that like if if let's say someone runs let's say mcfl wanted to come to us and start using boost we let's say in a private world we redo booster stadium and it's beautiful and it has a Turf track and all that Turf and all the things and we want to start renting out booster Stadium and mcfl want they get so large they have to start hosting stuff there they take gate money they take ticket money so then if the agents if there are agents within mcfl who work for mcps that couldn't happen we're put we're we're tying ourselves we could be making money from renting the stadium and we're saying that's not going to be possible because it's a it's a profitable no it's it's who who benefits from at least the way that I read and maybe Mr P has a different opinion but it's you cannot take equipment as an individual and then use it for your own financial gain you can't go and take out some truck personal gain you can't take a truck from the the high school and go use it the tow stuff and then make money from someone but the district could certainly be able to do that as a whole so the district could rent out the facility to the mcfl and the mcfl could make money off of it from the gate certainly U but of course the district is the one and no individual is profiting from The District's materials facilities and those items that's at least how I read this so can an employee of the district rent this Auditorium and sell tickets yes because they would renting the facility from the district and the district would make the money and then they could make but what would be in violation is if any employee of MTI came in here after hours and just used it of without but but I mean that's that's what this policy is covering let me use a different illustration say you're a PE coach and after school hours you are now providing whatever on your school campus for monetary you're having parents are paying you $10 an hour for you to provide said lesson in your gymnasium where you are the employee of record for the PE that is in violation of this but if you enter into a financial agreement with your school and you say I am now renting this then and I'm paying you then I can charge people to provide the services okay is that that's my interpretation when I read this and I understand the confusion when you read it but at least that's how I would conceive of this access providing access too to a public facility a tax pay room facility which is important but yeah it does seem a little gray so just to leave this one because the the only question that I had that I don't know that the board weighed in on at all was just to say do we have any intention or interest in saying that there are additional agencies at the state level that should be notified if conflict of interest if conflicts of interest occur I think it says state law at the end and so that that covers it um that yes it covers the fact that the discipline could occur in accordance to state law but it does not codify upon discovery of potential conflict of interest the disclosure of that conflict to anyone other than a federal agency in the event of a federal award and that's just a a board conversation to say if there has been an identified conflict of interest for anyone is there anyone that a teacher has a conflict of interest do we need to then make that known to any other agency the Board of Education who's provided the teacher certificate is that a responsibility of the district to notify anyone one of a conflict of interests dependent I I can't come up with the exact scenario but I'm just I'm trying to use an illustration that I a loose one but and if the board says no then fine but I that was that was my question because right now that third to last paragraph talks about disclosure of the potential conflict of interest and it really is only in the event of federal awards that the conflicts of interest need to be disclosed and I didn't know if there was any another instance where the board would agree I think they're again their professional duties to disclose that aren't captured within this policy as it reads that you are correct there are number each every time each of you fills out a recusal form um every time each of you uh indicates that I have a conflict every time I identify that I can't operate on a particular case because there is a conflict or in the situations where Mr Blackman and I have to get together because he may have a conflict of interest with a particular um uh case that he's working on or in the case of some discipline cases I would be conflicted because I would sit as the representative of the board during a contested hearing and so in those situations we disclose the conflict internally or publicly depending upon what the requirements of that conflict are so none of those are captured by this policy but I don't think that this policy although it's titled conflict of interest it's not the endall Beall of every potential conflict that you may have to disclose or you may H or or may have to be not only disclosed to the people that matter but also reported if there was a conflict of interest that proceeded forward um that in in which someone you know acted improperly because remember a conflict of interest doesn't necessarily mean someone has proceeded to act on it and act them properly it just means that you know I may have a conflict of interest in in going forward in a particular area because of either my profession my relationship with someone else or uh my role so I do think that if we were going to in in keeping with what you were saying I would probably if if we took a long time we could probably we could probably work out a lot of additional potential conflicts of interest that could occur and that could be added to the policy um I don't and that's not my intention so I'm I'm not trying to interrupt you I'm sorry it's not my intention my intention is we have a policy in place for a reason that spe specifies conflict of interest this particular paragraph talks about violation of this policy my question is is there any upon so let's hypothesize that you did have a conflict of interest in something and you still weighed in on it and you still just were digging your heels in I'm still going to do whatever I'm going to do and you're not going to do that but I'm just for the case of for the sake of argument here then is it anyone's responsibility Beyond you as the employee to disclose that to anyone else but if you have a let's say you've done something that's in violation of the Florida bar because of how you've weighed in on a conflict and it is a legit conflict of interest is it anyone's responsibility to disclose that because this policy gives the district the responsibility to disclose if that conflict is on a federal award but it doesn't give them the authority to report that conflict to anyone else for any other reason so I'm just saying is it the board's interest to also include appropriate Federal agency or if applicable pass through entity or state agency or state governing Authority or state something because then that would give the opportunity if there was a blatant disregard for the conflict of interest policy and continued blatant disregard and acknowledgement yes I'm I don't care what it says I'm still doing this then whose responsibility is it to report that and without encapsulating that in policy I don't know whose responsibility is yeah and I go back to the first paragraph of this policy which kind of then um sort of gives an overview that I think probably reminds everyone of the context um but again I think it is also difficult to capture to capture I mean to capture every potential but I I think that what I hear you saying is that perhaps something that provides an affirmative duty to report a known conflict of interest um to it may not even be a regulatory Authority uh you know but but I think then the problem that is imposing a duty for that people report a potential conflict of interest means that you now have a large number of people who now feel professionally obligated when they don't have enough information about whether potential conflict of interest is even actually occurring I mean this isn't like a case of suspected abuse or something like that they just might have sort of an inkling or a hint or a belief that maybe a conflict is is is happening but in some cases I think that of course in the employees own case or the or the director administrator whatever they would absolutely have a uh the need to disclose now when it's used by a third party to say I believe that you are operating with a conflict of interest um and now if I think you are then I have to I have a duty to report it to someone else and who's going to report to of course that may then result in a whole bunch of people feeling professionally obligated to make to make make reports of conflict of interests where they don't have enough information to even suspect that or it's it's it's a you know it it's so it's difficult I don't I don't know the answer unless we were going to rewrite or add a number of paragraphs that we'd have to draft separately so I can only speak to the purposes of just what the what you see in green was and un and unfortunately all I can speak to is what the code of fed Federal Regulations having required that were were sort of read flagging that to say hey if you run into one of these situations you know we could be in trouble for not reporting it we need to do that make sure we do that um in other cases it may very well be a good option and so I'd invite if we want to discuss how to structure such a thing we could or it could be something that we accept this policy as we do now and add for you know the the next update that we wish to research and develop additional you know options for that Neola hasn't suggested anything beyond that I don't see a specific draft um but we could we certainly can so it doesn't sound like any board member is interested in adding it so we can move on that was my my question was does the board want to entertain having a conversation about any state agency that just including the word state agency but doesn't sound like anybody else is weighing in so we can move on what's what's interesting is is that Neola has proposed anything and I I wonder why that is because generally you know we rely on them as the yeah as The Guiding lights you know as as board members were're certainly Bound by our own you know code of ethics and self-governance and all of those things um so I guess I would ask if it's appropriate to ask Neola you know is this a question coming from other boards as well and is it something they should be looking into and because it is weird that it's just you know Federal yes so I I can I can reach out senola and find out the the reasoning for that but I I can tell you that based on what they provided us this update was from volume 23 number okay so this was a this was a September 2024 update and they provided no additional reasoning for why that was in there so um that would tell me that there's not I it may have been that in in their General review which they do from time to time usually what they do is add things that are statutory updates I don't see this to be a statutory update I just see that perhaps they reviewed this and it maybe came to their attention when it was brought to their attention somewhere else that someone had adopted this or someone had inquired about this and so they decided to include it for um you know within they they thought of it as a good idea and wanted include it in all policies so I don't have any additional information beyond that so I'd be guessing it because it would be interesting to see if other boards are have this in there Madam chair I think attorney pow there's a special update I think addendum to this isn't this part of a federal batch it's it's outlined in the document that says that's why it's coming from Neola this was the last 10 or 12 or so that were 15 that came to review and this was the Office of Management and budget had review from their requirements so I think that's why it's Federal focused which might answer the questions the board has because there are requirements from the federal government I think these things be in policy and Neola made these updates based on the requirements from the federal government out lined in there there are other conflict policies that we have and gift policies that we have as well yeah so the special update um within the special update office exactly office management and budget revised some of their guidance for Grants and agreements that's the um guidance for federal assistance um located in title 2 and uh per their guidance recipients of Federal fiscal year 2024 State administrative formula grants such as Title One and idab B uh issued on or after July 1st could implement the revised 2024 unit form guidance effective on that date provided they have revised any applicable State policies and procedures um so it is globally part of just general generally omb's revised guidance um of to CFR so I would concur with what you said moving on policies in this update were reviewed by um Bruce de and manit um attor at law and by sniffen and Spelman for consistency with federal and state law respectively got it I just um while we're on it there's also a 3129 conflict of interest policy can you roll this that's because where there's a everything that we put do in one of these will need to be copied over into those those cross sections because it one applies to Administration one applies to there's one for students there's one for one for instructional staff instructional staff non instructional but the changes are consistent throughout we unless we determine that that one specifically doesn't apply the changing changes as we were emailed are consistent throughout yes and we didn't make any changes just now we just basically said we're not doing the option correct but no other changes were made so that'll be consistent in all the numbers that end in one 12 n yeah I guess that's what I'm trying to say is do we need to touch on conflict of interest again when we get to 31 when we get to it I'll just we move on okay I got I got it all I'm ready to go okay as we are we comfortable with the chain that change being applied to all of them and then us not yeah we'll we'll for 3129 as well we will delete the check box on that one as well and 4129 4129 MH unless this board determines that it wishes it to apply to some but not others I think we're good we good we good okay okay next is 11 129.0 page 27 fing next is 1210 standards of ethical conduct page 28 and I did have a question on page 29 the included information says certificate holder serving as principal is it implied that this is a principal who is a teaching certificate holder it's not is then who what is the certificate is it the principal certificate is it a teaching that was the question I had because just calling it certificate holder serving as principal caused me confusion as to what the certificate is the person is holding and I'll just say I read this as having principal designation on their teaching certificate which is not and I may have interpreted it incorrectly but how I interpreted it was not holding a teaching certificate not holding a certification in a leadership but holding a certif a designation of of um that we're doing through nissle thank you I always want to say NEPA and I don't even know what NEPA is through nissle for principal designation but Dr guller and I read it as teaching certificate holder like that you do have your teaching certificate holder that that's not going to prevent you from accessing certain things used and again maybe I I'm just confused as to what the certificate is it um board it's my understanding that Neola made comments on this as well attorney Powers if you want to weigh in Neola has already sort of explained this there were a number of policies uh in from their their Florida local update 25 number one the I do not see that as to this particular policy this one has a rule change 1129 01 there was a rule change that was recently passed and this is just um adding the language from the rule to the policy and it copies the rule language word for word X A-10 081 so for this board member the rule isn't clear I still don't understand what certificate we're talking about and I don't care what the rule says I'm curious to know what it's supposed to be because is it a teaching certificate is it a principal certificate is it some other kind of certificate and maybe I'm just not knowledgeable in this particular area but to just call it certificate holder causes me confusion I I'm seeing 681081 as being as the principles of professional contuct relating to policy 1210 I'm not seeing it on 1210 okay 1210 um revisions to policy 1210 incorporate amendments to Florida Administrative Code rule 6 A- 10.08 One Professional principles of professional conduct related to prohibited conduct for principles who are also certificate holders the prohibitions address certain actions related to material used in a classroom made available in a local classroom Library are included in a reading list so that's the that's the explanation we have applies to teachers the teacher license because it's under the rule for teachers and so it's if a principal holds AIC certificate yes so is there a way to include that word or is it just implied and I we don't need to add it that that's because there are additional certificates well and I would argue it's not implied since we both interpreted it differently based on our unique perspectives so I mean yeah because I I think of a it's of course a principal as a teaching certificate but they also have other designations to be a principal so I saw it as greater than a teaching certificate so the rule is listed in I mean I understand it may not be the clearest thing but the rule is at the top and one could check the rule in the future to see what it references or we could add or we could just add the word teaching so my proposal is that the first sentence in green uh say uh pursuant to the principles of professional conduct of Education profession a principal who is a teaching certificate holder or if it's called is it called teaching certificate or is it called educator certificate it's called teaching C I guess um I think it's called is it educator I think it's called whatever it's specifically called and you can look at it later and figure it out I don't it's just we don't have to do it right now I just think that we need to add a word my question would be are there principles who hold uh who do not hold an educator certificate but hold a uh a a different uh I would say their certificate has has further endorsements and maybe that's what they're called you have a reading endorsement you have your um your certif you have your educational leadership certification on your and and so just using the word certificate leaves an absence of clarification of which which endorsement or certificate are we are we talking about the teaching certificate as a whole are we talking about the principal designation um I'm pulling up the administrative code right now to see what their language I can't read that there we go okay uh as you can see throughout the administrative code the term certificated individual or certificate holder is what's used and in the bottom 17d a certificate holder so this is exactly language of of the floid administrative code serving as school principal shall not prevent direct School Personnel to prevent or allow School Personnel to prevent students from accessing any material used in a classroom Etc so and again refers to certificate get holder so I would I I am always more comfortable uh maintaining the if if if they have placed it in a rule or statute that uh maintaining that language instead of putting our own spin on it even if it would appear to be more clear sounds good moving on like it it is unclear we'll just let the record show it is unclear thank you Department of Education all right moving right along okay uh one two see I'm I'm sorry I have to apologize I've got a whole punch where I'm trying to read numbers 1220 that's that's why I was on the last one I had the wrong numbers there um one 220 evaluation of administrative Personnel that's page 30 I do have a brief question and this will literally be a brief question on the very last sentence of this policy which appears on on page 32 all substantial revisions to the evaluation system must be reviewed and approved approved by the board before being used to evaluate School administrators to my knowledge the board has not weighed in perhaps prior to my being on the board but the board has not weighed in on any evaluation instrument of school administrators and so I was just curious if that's something that we have listed somehow in the evaluation system that it was board approved in 1996 or or something to that effect but this one sentence says that the board must approve what's happening with school administrator evaluations a very last sentence and I don't know again it it says substantial revisions to the evaluation system I don't know how often the evaluation system has been edited or changed if the evaluation systems been in place for 30 years that's fine I just am curious to know if it does have it date stamped as to when the board approved it and if it was a board in 1996 I'm fine with that that's well I mean I'm just so if I could speak I I'm um board member Campbell I'm not aware of any changes since I've been here um so I know we are there's a a committee already being formed to to review a couple of them but to my knowledge nothing's been been revised prior to that I don't know but we can certainly check on the original date okay y but once we approve this policy as amended or whatever I don't know that this is an addition or anything it doesn't look like it but then any revisions to that evaluation system will need to be reviewed and approved by the board okay moving on okay M we did edit the copyright date on that particular policy um so next we'd have 31 one 1231 outside activities of Administrators page 33 1242 professional learning page 35 1281 use of employees personal property at school this was technical update 40 I'll just add I have nothing in the 10,000's left so okay I have I guess uh I I will read through these relatively quickly if you know that you have one just stop me but I wanted to put on the record that we've addressed each one 1362 anti-harassment beginning on page 41 I have a question on page 43 which is under [Music] B definitions and then B under harassment because we are amending this policy to now State this is uh B subsection two has the effect of substantially interfering with an employees educational performance it previously stated students so every time we re reference employees and this is in multiple times anti-harassment occurs if the board concurs I believe it should say with the with an employes job performance as opposed to educational performance because student has an educational performance an employee has a job performance yeah I agree you can go with that good yeah that's fine so that would be on every one of our anti-harassment policies that end in 362 did you see where I was talking about Terry okay uh if you scroll down past the Roman num 3 uh you must have passed it already I'm sorry you're in yeah in Roman numeral 3 Item B up right there where it says uh number two has the effect of substantially interfering with an employees job performance as opposed to educational performance thank you and so every time again all the policies ending in 362 that are anti-harassment that can be a change we make to all of them because they all have the same and that's all I have in the 1000 there's also a cross cross reference to these policies in 1362 33 62 and 4362 so we'll make a note to address that the same on each thank you 1410 administrative salary page 54 2210 curriculum develop I'm sorry we're done with the 1000s then yes okay moving on to 2000s 2210 curriculum development page 57 2215 program of instruction beginning on page 60 and so I did have a question on this because it there's a lot that was struck through here and perhaps it was in the deregulation uh statutes that have now occurred but there's a lot that has been struck through here so my assumption is that all of the teaching on financial literacy and communism and all of that is no longer needed in policy because that's what all has been struck through here there's there was two options staff had to choose from they chose option two resilien and they chose that because it Sayes the law and Rule which means it should provide more flexibility going forward in case the statute or rule is amended and that was they chose the one with a bit less said to provide more flexibility okay so again I appreciate that that resiliency education it but if they're believing that that's all encompassing to include financial literacy and the study of Communism and whatever else is in here that's been struck through than U the history of African-Americans I'm like there's a Asian-American there's a there's a lot of I I appreciate them trying to make it simpler but that's my question the notes that I have are that the revisions to policy 2215 are the result of Senate Bill 1264 and House Bill 1329 the revisions modify required instruction related to Medal of Honor recipients Veterans Day Memorial Day and history of Communism required instruction pertaining to the history of Communism must be implemented at the beginning of the 26 27 school year so the intention is that we'll have a policy update before then and we'll add it back in I guess I mean it's it's just interesting because they I I mean I I guess we did have some deregulation that's caused some of this to be removed from policy but I don't know why I think there maybe part of the issue is option two has actually been struck out and that should not be struck out that actually should be included so we'll just make sure that's what staff requested so the very last or P 64 H 64 option two that should be selected that's what St that that was exactly that was a staff recommendation oh there you go and it's all they all encompassing historic accuracy foll and it references the statute and the rule and that's they chose that one because those things may change change and we'll be able to have the flexibility going forward at least that was the thinking of Staff when I reviewed this with them and that's probably the confusion is because option two has been struck out as well because it was like all gone right so the the Florida statute 1342 potentially will continue to be amended and so whatever that statute references is what we're going to teach that's correct it anchors to the statute okay but I can see the confusion because it's been struck out thank you that's I'm like I don't understand how we justmore we just got rid of all the things that are clearly in statute that we have to do okay was a request find uh if we go over some of the other policies and detail you'll see that Neil has also been recommending kind of saying Less in some of the policies and referencing more statutes so this is I think one of their efforts sense okay I can appreciate that thank you for the clarification so we're yeah you're adding it all back in thank you Terry because that was not clear I was like well all of a sudden we don't have to teach all this stuff well that doesn't sound right give us just a moment to yeah no that's fine she's got to retype all that okay next is uh policy 2260 non-discrimination and access to equal Educational Opportunity that's page 66 226.11 Ada prohibition against discrimination based on disability page 75 2220 2266 non-discrimination on the basis of sex and education programs and activities page 80 2271 articulation and access to Florida college system institutions technical change page 95 2370 educational options page 98 23701 virtual instruction page 100 2371 hope scholarships page 102 2415 tutoring for credit I have something there okay page 104 104 so it says in option two it is the Bo policy of the school board to Grant credit for tutoring what credit are we granting for tutoring this is a part of the raise act which will be um I believe going for and I'm I'm not obviously this not my area but my understanding reviewing with staff is um this is a part of the raise act and something that that staff is interested in doing going forward where they're able to have students provide tutoring and for tutoring you can provide them credit it's an option High School Credit like El elective credit I'm going to defer to the staff that specializes in that that's okay well yeah um until someone can give explanation on that I'm not sure I feel comfortable with this because and further down there it talks about a spon as well right they get paid and they get credit gave it's usually at one or the other and staff recommended the credit not the U pay option this is certainly we don't have to participate in the program I don't believe we need to participate in the program but staff seemed interested in being able to provide it thinking it was a good opportunity for both the older students and the younger students to benefit from this but the just I guess the part the part I'm struggling with is high school students providing tutoring for original credit what is the credit what kind of credit are we get and and I can reach out to staff to see yeah I just think maybe if we could put this in a pocket and get some more information and then come back to it that would be great and also for clarification currently staff has chosen not just credit but also the statement that says high school students serving as tutors for after school tutoring may be provided a stien so they've they've included both of those statements X is check yeah there would be being an option with that or a availability but I know they told me before they were interested in the credit certainly uh possibility could be flexibility to either and staff can decide how it goes forward or the school board can direct staff on what they would prefer okay well that was my only um concern so maybe we can Circle back to it when we have some more information from staff about their desires I I mean I I'm I'm willing to hear it out and if it makes sense and there's reasons behind it I just don't quite understand it right now yeah yes further explanation would be great because you know a kid could be working at McDonald's and getting money or they could be working as a tutor especially if they're thinking about becoming a teacher or a parah and being able to make some money so I don't have any problem with it but I'd like to know a little more about it what the credit would be well that's my thing is like then why are we then why do we have like then why are we having to terminate teachers when they haven't passed their proper tests in three years can we just call them a tutor then and give them so they can get original credit I mean I don't think they'd want that little of a stien potentially but what I'm what I'm saying is what what are the intricacies because understood it seems a little confusing so um Madam chair board I I agree with you um I have I would like this to be pulled and considered for another time thank you I've added it to our list for tomorrow all right well we only have one so far well I if maybe a little I think she's saying she doesn't want to address it right now at all right I I don't unless there's something and I'll have to consult to withdraw this this yes because unless there's something that requires us to do this right now I think this is going to take a little more time if that's permissible to the board yes and it is listed several times we we have I understand as long as it doesn't conflict with law then I I think this is takes more time I I agree with the board given that everything within this update is optional um then that that it's to provide the board and the district with um just simply the option so does not need to proceed forward we'll withdraw this as one that is going to be edited by the board at this time if that's the board's pleasure and when we get to the items in uh the 300s and the 4000s we'll just review them and see if those also need to be pulled because there are some some tutoring policies that are forthcoming understood that's fine with me does the board have consensus on that yes I'm just looking at this a little closer and it's a instructional personnel and high school students serving as tutors for after school tutoring may be provided at stien okay all right yeah it'll be interesting to get more information on this number it's available there is a there is a one moment now we're the the other two policies are 3341 3415 4415 is that correct we're on the parallel policies no okay next is uh 2421 career in technical education page 105 2423 school to work program page 115 2432 driver education page 117 22 sorry 2440 summer programs page 118 2455 Dropout prevention and academic intervention programs page 120 2460 exceptional student education page 121 2520 selection and Adoption of instructional materials page 127 2521 instructional materials program page 132 2540 audio visual use uh page 142 2700 academically High performing school districts page 144 that concludes the 2000s moving on to the 3000s instructional staff 31 2.03 athletic coaches page 146 I have something on that and I it is what I have is a crossover to 31208 4120 and 41208 because they're all kind of the same the thing I have the question 8 or 03 we're on athletic coaches yes 31 2.03 should crossover have yes 3120.4 to 31208 to 41203 to 4 20.08 they're all for the same with the same language it's it's just referencing being CPR first dat and ad8 certified um and this may be just be a procedural question but in other places in policy we've dictated who who or what position holds the keeper of that kind of information is is this something that our District staff like Mr Tucker um District ad is responsible before is this a site based recordkeeping what is um it's not indicated here and so if if that is something that we've done in procedure then that's fine but that's the question I have where is and is it are they certified before practice starts before they start I I understand that that's the expectation but do we want that clarified so I think it would be important that it's indicated that prior to prior to participation or prior to coaching or or whatever um or that the certificate is good for one year or whatever like if you got the certification in whenever last January of last year then you're still good right now who's to who holds this who holds that's what I'm saying is this a district is this a district check and balance or is this a these check and balance I would say being District but I don't know be do I mean I would imagine that a site a school-based athletic director is the person who is checking these things for their coaches that would be my perception of how it works but that could be inaccurate I think districtwide that'd be very diff this I'm sorry we were un is this a question about the procedure or about how you want to I'm asking if part of that should be Ed and encapsulated in the policy that's what I thought yes like because it doesn't say when they need to it just says they shall be certified are they supposed to be certified before they start I would hope so decide but shall be certified prior to right right but I think her question is that's the word tode I mean is it inappropriate to put that they shall be certified to encapsulate the time in here and it's supposed to be in procedure well so long as the certification is valid then they've met the requirements of policy uh as to when it's Val valid I'd say at any time during that which they're employed so if they're employed as a as a coach um they have to have that certification now who job description right so I mean well it's immediately upon once they're once they're performing that Duty they have to be certified so during that time but the language changed to all employed Public School athletic coaches shall be shall hold a valid certification in yada yada yada yada first because then they're holding a valid one versus it's saying shall be certified but there's no there's no time we're not not saying when they should be certified and so Oopsy Daisy been coaching for three years just realized yeah and your question as to who's the keeper of the information I don't I don't know that's and that if that's a procedural thing then that's a procedural thing and it doesn't need to be in policy but I just I think that we have seen just this football season not here in Maring County but in other places medical episodes occur that are catastrophic and I do not want ever for uh maybe our coach to not have what they needed to properly respond to a medical episode and this is too vague for me in my opinion and so I just want it to be less vague about when that certification needs to be valid and as the board yeah I certainly appreciate that as the board you are uh you're going to be required under this professional certification and the administrative rule that we're pulling up now to ensure that there was a that that it meets the language that they put forth and again that language and that Florida code is pretty much equivalent to what you see there if you add on additional requirements you may do so within policy if you wish typically the board wishes to scale its policy back and allow that to be a procedural item that that is addressed by procedures that are implemented by the district to ensure that what you say in policy gets happening so the keeping track of who uh I don't think that applies to this I mean the last line about CPR does but we're not talking about a certification for coaching we're talking about CPR right and and part of the challenge is none of the other hired educators like I'm just we don't have a specific job description for an athletic coach we don't have a specific job description just for a coach that would require this so it's enshrined in policy not in their job description so we can't until we say when we want this to be actionable we can't say before they can be hired they have to have this or before they they not really hired they're I mean some of them are volunteers but this is employed all of these are employed so this is If you're receiving a paycheck from the district to be a coach and we have all those stiens that we give them then you have to maintain this right so then for me I just wanted to say valid um it's about the time it's it's about the time frame of the certification that's what I'm trying to shall maintain at all times while performing their duties all employed Public School athletic coaches shall maintain certification yes that's fine that's fine so at all you said at all at all times while in the performance of their duties or yeah while employed as athletic coaches at all times while while it you can just stop right there because you've got employed already there I got all just take out the word all Terry and that should yeah at all times why while employed comma Public School athletic coaches will maintain shall maintain shall maintain certific do they have off Seasons where they're not coaching but they're still teaching for example if they're receiving their stipend as a coach they have to yes and that's what this is right but I'm I'm envisioning that situation in which you have a uh someone who is uh who is sure they're a basketball coach so it's it's it's an offseason right and then if they're if they're employed as a teacher but they're also have a stien as a basketball coach and it's not basketball season saying at all times while employed means there's a problem so I would say at all times while performing their duties or at all times while employed as Public School athletic coaches comma do you want to further Define something that says also whether it's employed is it employed to receive a stien if you're just receiving a stien but you're not actually employed by the district you don't I mean it could happen because we do have coaches who are not otherwise employed by the district well that's what I was trying to get out earlier is like not all right so if you're changing the employed now um so they're classified as volunteers that get paid yeah yeah people are people just are with the district solely for I understand that I'm just so we classify them as volunteers I that's why that's why I was I was and you're helping me get there but I was trying to say at all times while performing duties as an athletic coach that's a good one at all at all times while performing duties as but then your covering all your volunteers that aren't that aren't employed correct because I think any person who's working with our athletes should be ready and prepared for a medical episode and have have have the certification so that if if something horrible were to happen they have an up-to-date certification and they were the person we were entrusting to to be there you want this to apply to only coaches or also assistant public assistant well no we get there in the next policies so when we fix the language here it's going to be applicable to the other three I mentioned okay at all times while performing duties as a public school athletic coach um yeah the individual shall maintain a certification in shall maintain how about this at all times while performing duties as Public School athletic coaches um hang on one moment let me think for a second and a certification in CPR first a a at all times while performing duties as Public School athletic coaches individuals shall maintain certification in card pulmonary resuscitation yes so shall be certified and take at all times while performing duties as Public School athletic coaches the individuals individuals shall maintain uh yeah that's fine individual actually how about just how about just Public School athletic coaches shall maintain certifications in cuz I mean if you're a public school athletic coach to have it cuz now we're adding in it's only while you're performing the duties as being a coach all public school athletic coaches uh shall maintain certification in that's certification with an S maintain valid like I'm still think maintaining certification is is like what I was going with that I mean unless the word maintain is is insinuating that it's not expired yeah is valid insinuate an next it does with driver's licenses but that's what I'm saying add the word valid valid up to date like sha maintain a valid valid implies it's up to date that's what that's the word I'm trying to get at it I guess so um going back we could delete the first part and just say uh all public school athletic coaches shall maintain a valid valid certific certifications in cardiopul resuscitation first aid and the use of an automated external defat thank you and then it it's copy pasted to 31208 41203 and 41208 based on my lucky look through okay hang on I'm make a note so I can do those we don't have to stop for them 31 2008 which is I think the next policy which is the assistant coach policy3 we're going to push into 31 20.08 and I think it's 41203 and 41208 okay we'll take care of that thank you anything else on that one you got everything you need okay 31 20.08 then part-time extracurricular Personnel other than that change and so again just for clarification the recommendation was anybody who's getting paid and so this one again is part-time extracurricular that are being paid paid so additional requirements for employment of the coaches who are not full-time employees so this isn't addressing volunteers at this point just for further clarification yes and yeah and in my perfect dream world we would but I think we're let's just for the sake of staying focused on the policy yep okay getting rid of the word it it didn't preserve the formatting so we'll have to add it later I've got a note for us okay 3129 conflict of interest let's take a look and ensure that we want to install and and the same changes and yeah just to select the same options include the paragraph that doesn't we didn't add the X there in the however pursuant to Federal rules paragraph on page 149 that's the only thing we did on conflict of interest is not check the box so that's the only thing we had to do on this whole policy was not check Bo okay gotcha we hashed out all the rest of the things that we're not going to do so yeah we're just not checking that box 31 29.1 tutoring this goes back to the tutoring question if the district elects to participate in tutoring program created for reading achievement for reach act instructional personnel and high school student surance tutors may be provided to stien so this one needs to be pulled as well yes I mean we can't exclude the policy in general we can exclude the changes because we already have a tutoring policy right so we're going to exclude the changes on this policy 3 31 29.01.2012 changes exclude SL withdraw changes but if there's no changes then we don't need to vote on it because it's already an existing policy right so we'll pull those before it goes to public hearing 3130 appointment assignment transfer and promotion of instructional staff page 151 and I have a question on page 152 I do too okay do you want to start with yours um yes one second 152 is where my question is as well um the inexperienced teachers so um for me I understand why we've changed the temporary certified because temporary certified has now expanded to five years for for some folks and so I can appreciate that um I think that I'm just a little hesitant about about all of it I'm not sure I guess Dr Campbell if you have more established thoughts on it then that's fine but I don't know I just am um feeling a sense of hesitation so my question wasn't entirely about inexperienced teachers but it's in the same section because the first sentence of this under assignment to schools graded D ORF I think this is the section you're talking about yes ma'am pursuant to statutory requirements the percentage of inexperience this is this is my question the percentage of inexperienced teachers teachers in need of improvement or out of field teachers assigned to schools graded D or F under state law shall be greater than the district average not be greater not sorry sorry shall shall not be greater than the district average well that's my question so is that the district average of all teachers all teachers by grade level all teachers by whatever or well anyway that that's my first question my second question is how often is the district average calculated because with a 100 vacancies our district average may change from week to week month to month so that that the inexperienced teacher part I think we have similar questions but my question specifically is about the shall not be greater than the district average and how are we determining District average I can start by answering the inexperienced teacher question that was um put in there specifically because of a statutory change uh Senate Bill 7002 amended this Florida statute under 2A there you can see um by replacing the term that was formerly used temporarily certified with inexperienced teacher meaning one who has been teaching three years or less so that is now a defined term so that's why that change as to the other portion of your question um let that that's if you can if you want to flesh that out any further that's that I don't I'm not in disagree information experience teacher I understand where that's coming from I think the premise of my question stemmed from as Dr Campbell said how are we defining the district average because if we look across the district at our average new teachers on our campuses what is that look like and is it is it typically when we have a school go into turnaround status those moves and such are occurring leading up to the start of the school year and then as they have vacancies filling those vacancies ensuring that they're filling them with highly qualified staff and again and 2A that's just yeah I agree that that that's the reason why the update is there but you've got a good point how do we Define the district average the district average would be calculated by obviously just how many people what your percentage of inexperienced teachers throughout the district is um teachers in need of improvement they don't want obviously the goal here is that they don't want us putting only brand new teachers out of field teachers or inexperienced teachers in those schools who are getting a d ORF more so than we would in a um in any other school it has to be at least better than that yes I I I don't know how it's calculated within our district and so if that's encapsulated in procedure then that's fine I guess it still begs the question are we talking K5 teachers well I agree is it Elementary like I mean typically this issue is only prevalent in our elementary schools we we don't really we've we have been pretty blessed to stay away from secondary and so are we including the district average of inexperienced teachers in secondary if we're only talking about elementary right and that I don't believe that's defined in statute for sure but I I think it does require further clarification just from and again if it's enshrined in procedure so be it but we we as the board can stipulate further in policy to say shall not be greater than the district average of like schools or yeah like schools would would cover it that you want to make that modification because that's not what statute says I understand that but if we have veteran teachers all throughout secondary and I don't ever want to think that we're going to have another dlev school but if all of our teachers at secondary are all veterans and they're skewing our district average and the predominant number of our K5 teachers specifically in three through five are all brand new and we have X number of D schools or X number I don't I want to say that but if the district average is calculated as a whole I don't know that we can that we can manipulate that information not because not being in a m not saying in a bad way but I would want to defer to attorney Blackman also because the bottom uh portion of that policy does also or bottom portion of that section indicates the superintendent will annually certified to the commission of Education that these requirements are being met and so if she's going to be sending such certification I'm pretty sure that she would want to ensure that it's based on what the statute actually says not how the district has calculated it if and but I understand your point if there if we've got if it's very hard to get yet another veteran teacher I'm sorry if if there's a very large class of Veteran teachers um it's going to be harder in elementary schools to get to to get that so I just I would I would have uh my recommendation would be that if that's something that needs to be enshrined in procedure um or if there is another portion that needs to be added separately I just don't want to control the same subject here because statute tells you to do it one specific way doesn't really Define what district average is but I think if we Define District average to mean something other than just a flat districtwide average we are asking for a possible problem okay but you hear our concerns yes board it may be helpful um because this is not articulated here but the Bureau of school Improvement which is known as BSI is the one who manages this um it helps to ensure the statute implementation from the Department of Education we work very closely with them so as they look at monitor um schools that are um articulated here they look at that data they identify that data and work with school district so I think in practice it's already there and embedded through the Department of Education through BSI is there any alteration we want to make no um next is uh 30 whole bunch again 3231 outside activities of staff page 155 and I don't have anything else in the 3000s personally uh just I don't remember if I do or not let's keep going 3242 professional learning page 157 3281 use of employees personal property at school page 162 3362 anti-harassment it's the same change we made previously it's on page 165 to State under B harassment item two employees job performance and that was going to be duplicative of the same as 1362 it is okay okay moving into the 4000s sh yes recommend that we take a nice break if that is the will of the board then I'm open to whatever anyone wants to do um we can it's 1230 now we can break till 1 s like a plan okay because we're already well we're close to halfway there and I don't have anything in the 4000s personally and well everything I had is already is a duplicate of stuff we've already talked about so I don't know if anyone else has things in the 4000s but maybe we could finish the 4000s and thenon um Mo most of mine are are changes that have already been made I think I I think we might have some conversation on the um no we that's addressed let me just give me yeah 30 seconds to look through my questions no pressure 30 seconds yeah I I had circled every time that we referenced a policy that doesn't have a number yet um I I don't have a ton more questions but it's up to you the board if we want to go ahead and break it it doesn't matter I I don't know that I have more than 30 minutes left yeah I mean I don't have a lot of big stuff left either but I'm fine to take a a lunch break I just just wanted to make sure maybe we could get through the 4,000 a stopping point I was trying to watch for us to get halfway also yeah we yes continue is what I'm hearing yes 4,000 can we do 30 minutes after 4,000 yes is that okay all right okay the 4000s uh 41203 athletic coaches 41 20.08 too about the the CPR already noted those 41208 part-time extracurricular Personnel same thing with the coach conversation 4129 conflict of interest page 178 we are not checking that box just making sure there's there was no other okay no other alteration there right correct page 79 is yeah we just passed 41291 tutoring being pulled because we're not having any changes made to that policy EST State 4242 professional learning support staff 181 4281 use of employees personal property at school technical update page 184 4362 anti-harassment page 185 and it has the change um again the job employees job same change apply to this that applied to 1362 and 3362 it does okay that concludes the 4000s there you go how about that I probably have 30 minutes left I mean that's fine okay well we will take a break until uh 1:00 and it's about 12:37 now thank you everyone e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e good afternoon everyone we are back on at 12:59 p.m. to continue our policy's work session all right thank you attorney Powers well we're now moving to the 5,000 and as to the 5000s we have 5130 termination of school enrollment page 198 5136 wireless communication devices page 200 50 is that 330 5330 5330 53301 self-administered medication and epinephrine use page 203 53304 administration of short acting Bronco dilators and components by trained School Personnel page 205 and I do have a question this is a brand new policy uh being put in on page 206 at um the paragraph immediately following the Bold section acquisition of shorted acquisition and shortage of short acting Broncho dilators and components this with it being a new policy it's not something we currently have in place but the policy will now give principles the opportunity to request that we have a stock pile essentially of um inhalers for student as needed and so my question is just do we anticipate this happening and certainly if we enshrine it in policy and I understand this was a big this was a big deal in Tallahasse this year they they wanted this was conversation a lot I understand the need for it certainly um but I just if we anticipate this happening do we need to get ahead of it from a procedural standpoint as to grant funding Hospital District partner whomever that can help us with Heart of Florida Health Center that kind of so I'll be happy to answer these question when staff reviewed this they said they don't have an interest in doing it right now but the idea was in case we want to this policy will allow us the opportunity to stock the inhalers but currently um this is this is something that they do not currently want to do at this moment okay that was my question I just was this something that we anticipated being something the team wanted to take on I I mean I certainly see the value of it I I understand um sometimes students on athletic fields or on a court or something that sometimes it it's the the need is would would be warranted but I also can understand why the team wouldn't want to necessarily have them that might get out of date that was my question any more conversation around this policy um I just to give you also historically the notes that I have is that uh it's House Bill 883 that modified Florida statute 10220 that was the K12 student and parent rights to include several new Provisions related to short acting brona dilators the bill did change the term meter dose inhaler to short acting Bronco dilator the revisions to um these policies incorporate House Bill 883 uh specifically s to 533 0.1 uh in addition additionally in light of the the prevalence of such devices in school districts Neo offered 53304 as a standalone new policy and of course attorney Blackman just gave you staff's input on that okay thank you for that background um it makes me think about uh Naran has there been any policies introduced as far as Nar Naran there there have not not to my knowledge okay because I know some districts are talking about that especially in in our district where we've got kids coming on very very long bus rides and if something were to happen you know they get on a bus and fall out I'm I'm G to try to search it while you guys are talking okay yeah I wouldn't have even thought about it if I hadn't if this hadn't peaked my further all right but we can move on in the meantime 54 10.01 page 207 promotion acceleration placement and retention 5420 reporting student progress okay wait we so 5410 is student progression and then 54101 is promotion acceleration placement and retention yes okay perfect so now we're at reporting student progress is 216 5420 reporting student progress 5460 graduating require graduation requirements 218 5463 credits from other schools 24 5465 general education development GED tests 226 5500 student conduct 2 28 5505 academic honesty um my only question on this I made a note is there an AI policy because we don't actually have a policy number for the AI policy yet which is something we'll get to in a minute but I I made a couple of notes Here we have two different policies that are new in here that don't are currently have a policy number associated with them so it makes it difficult to fill in the blank and so that's one of them the artificial intelligence policy doesn't currently have a number on it so it's difficult to refer back to I I don't remember which one it is it's in the 800 yeah we we we do have one here on the list they haven't issued a policy number for it yet so it's a right ending I have one of those as well yeah there there's two different policies like that so anyway that was my question on that one what's the policy number but to be determined to be determined apparently yeah it's in the updates without the number we'll get to that well so um 551 17.01 bullying and harassment page 235 5610 removal out of school suspension disciplinary placement and expulsion of students page 242 5611 due process rights page 248 5630 corporal punishment and use of reasonable force and restraint page 250 I just have a question um I worked in a district a neighboring District that used corporal punishment which is personally not in alignment with how I view um um punishment my question is this policy essentially says that the superintendent has the at least the way I'm reading it a teacher or other member of the staff shall assume such Authority for control you have to have the permission of the parent um all Restraint of a student receiving ESC under 54 will be reported etc etc and so I'm just with regard to corporal punishment it's the position of the Schoolboard that it will not be administered under any circumstance corporal punishment is defined as such and so I just want to ensure that the board that is strong enough language that this board is maintaining that we're not using corporal punishment and also to ensure that I'm not missing somewhere that there is any level of vagueness in our desire to not use corporal punishment I just wanted to kind of make sure that we were all on the same page on this personally I don't want to use corporal punishment so I wanted to kind of ensure that that is and it's the position of the board that it will not be administered under any circumstances okay and as defines corporal punishment as def by Florida statute okay I have the statute if you want me to read what no as long as it's clear and that we're all on the same page I just it sparked my brain and so I wanted to make sure that it got discussed and reiterated so that option is no longer has hasn't has been and for a while yes since 2011 2011 all right anything else go ahead 7:30 equal access for non-district sponsored student clubs and activities page 251 5771 search and seizure it's 253 5780 student parent rights page 255 6110 Grant funds uh we skipped one sorry that's another hole punch uh new policy deartment is that page 267 2677 it is that um so that's the one I have that doesn't have a policy number with it um I I just had a quick question on it and the answer is probably yes so this probably will be very quick but this debarment policy gives the authorization to the purchasing specialist the facilities director or other design to have the authority to debar a person or Corporation I'm curious if the board wants the sole authority to land there or if somehow the board wants to weigh in on when we are choosing to debar a corporation or individual as background also this is a Maran policy which means it was created by uh staff here for use and to Dr Campbell's point my my my request would be instead of everything that's in that first line it say the superintendent the superintendent which is defined throughout is the superintendent or design will have the authority to debar blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah comma upon approval of the board or those are those are the two the reasons I pulled this so I I don't think it's necessary to specialize all of those people when we just say the superintendent has the authority to designate whoever they choose but then if a deartment is going to occur I do believe that it needs to come before the board I agree and and that is actually the hearing date so that does get there and the very last section of this policy um there's a that the board does weigh in and and there's a couple of times that the board weighs in I I can move forward with saying the superintendent and each one of those instances that that list of people is listed because I disagree with giving any authority to anyone other than the superintendent and your design because we certainly don't want somebody to go Rogue go Rogue yeah well it's listed for separate times it is I would like to see that changed and then that's fine if if we're encapsulating the board hearing it at the end that's fine with me and provide a little bit of History this this um Department policy already existed but it was a part of only one particular procurement type and so the idea was to pull out the deartment and create a separate one so the language is the green part yes it's new but it's being pulled out of one policy to make a new one the green parts are the new additions to it obviously as the board has already indicated you want to change it to superintendent but the idea that there already is an ability for to request a hearing 10 days and those sorts of procedures or policies are already in place before this is just now spanning it to be any kind of um competitive solicitation right yes purchasing right so are the edits removing and just placing a superintendent is that uh within I hear what Blackman's saying though he's saying or responsible for procurement of goods and services needs to be kept is that what you're saying no I'm sorry uh it's superintendent is perfectly acceptable I just want to provide some additional context for the board and for anyone who's listening that although it's considered a new po policy the content really there's really small parts that are being changed no but I I I agree the superintendent being capital S I think is the appropriate way to do it I didn't mean to suggest otherwise historical knowledge and it's like that through theorical knowledge polies yeah so yeah just for consistency so so basically I'm sorry basically the um purchasing Specialist or the facilities director can debar and suspend me no that's what we're I mean we're saying the superintendent is going to designate who can do it okay okay so it'll already be done based on that person's recommendation and then it will come before us unless they come before us and petition else how long does it take for it to get before Us's processin 10 days and then they appeal it and then we schedule a hearing 10 days it'll get to us so yeah it's all in the policy 10 days they won't be able to do business I really can't hear you sir I'm sorry so for 10 days they wouldn't be able to do business until the appeal is went through correct I'm not with us they would be debarred from us not from doing business they wouldn't be doing business with us correct because there's a problem they can appeal before the 10 days yeah that's within 10 days but they would be prevented from doing business until it comes before the board I think is a concern it's a concern yeah and it says within 10 days so we could concern what could be before okay if they're in an active job exactly what happens exactly does work stop I think the decision to debar would probably need to happen after the completion of that particular job or you know because otherwise I mean if you're debarring someone halfway through if you chose to do that would mean that that job needs to stop so exactly right so that was your point Bo y'all got it there also could be a valid reason for department and going forward immediately but you know debarment prevents prevents them from performing any additional Services prevents them from consideration for future contracts no the the work stops then correct it well you saying I'm debarred I'm through I mean I'm not doing this reads is we'll have the authority to debar a person Corporation for cause from consideration or Award of further contracts so you may be working a contract currently in the school district and then something you do in that contract causes us to say you are now being debarred from future consideration but it also it from future consideration sorry I was getting a phone call that totally through my yeah the the way I think I follow the way that this one is written it does indicate that it would prevent them only from consideration reward of further contracts so there are a couple of ways to write this one would be in such this this way as you see the other would be to to to stop that job and even completion of that job would no longer be permitted now that could be Troublesome given the fact that if there's a current not just for the completion of the job but because of the fact that we would have a contract with them at that point right but that's an entirely separate process so that that was sorry that was the continuation of thought that I lost so this is debarment from future consideration for further contracts if you are currently in process of working a contract and you somehow then stop that process because we've now debarred you from future consideration well then you're in breach of contract that's a totally separate process I would proceed with that under a contract resolution a contract breach resolution right right so I think those are two separate things based on what this this policy is to say we can debar you from future consideration or the current award being considered not that we're going to backdate your dearment and say now you have to stop all the work that you've been doing on the contractor currently working on no because at that point what we would have to do is generally our contracts are written in such a way that if per performance is unsatisfactory or inadequate and if there's a legal reason for it then it usually results in a breach of contract so we would pursue there's no reason why we couldn't pursue a breach of contract claim uh against them at the same time and and pursue whatever remedies are available to us at the same time we're initiating a bar a dearment however the two do not necessarily need to go together there would also be something like an immediate I cease and desist you know I'm trying to think of an example of what that might be you know maybe I don't even want to put ideas in people's heads but we we find out that there's something really egregious going on on the job site which is one of our property schools whatever we would just do an immediate cease and desist and then there would be breach of contract because they're not supposed to do those kinds of things and they said they weren't going to so that would take care of that right and that would be separate from dearit correct then because of whatever said instance because then that perhaps would then debar them from the future debar them from the future but it doesn't alter what they're currently in the process of doing there's an which is another process right which we would still be covered I just want to make sure we're clear on it on that okay on that because it can kind of be construed a little bit differently there is also federal law on Department which applies to this and that is in the instance in which we I'd have to VI in more detail to give you the better answer but in the in the case where someone is in the middle of performing a contract for us and they are debarred by another entity that in many cases forces us to discontinue doing business with them if it's federally funded so I I just to give you a complete answer that also exists so does that address your concern board cunnings yes okay anybody else all right Ming right along last policy was a number we were on 268 6110 Grant oh and by the way the policy number on that last one as soon as it's issued to us by NE then we'll put that um 6110 Grant funds 269 I'm sorry yes that's correct yep um 6111 internal controls P 274 6112 cash management of Grants P 276 6114 cost principles spending federal funds 278 6210 fiscal planning page 284 6235 fund balance page 286 6320 purchasing and Contracting for commodities and contractual Services page 288 and it has the dearment piece in it that will need a policy number but you guys know that okay once we get numbers it it just threw me off whenever we don't actually have numbers assigned or even which which one are you the policy you're on right now it's page 295 for us but it has debarment in it in this whole policy and it's at the very end debarments will be conducted pursuant to a policy number and it's just a blank right now so as soon as and I have something for this as soon as we get that we'll put it in okay so if we want to look at page 294 a conversation that came up probably multiple months now and it's something that I brought up that I'd like us to have a work session on but I think this can be separate than that um there was a conversation in a a work session I believe regarding Owner Direct purchase and the superintend super superintendent design having authority to circumvent the use of ODP in an effort for expediency and what the individual who was presenting said to us is that she essentially has the authority to make the decision in any case there is no parameters as to what quantifies how much money we don't do Owner Direct purchase and we had a brief discussion in that moment talking about Dr gullet and that basically we have awarded her $50,000 as the threshold um which is in the middle of page 294 it indicates that threshold and in that in that conversation I said well I'd like to establish a threshold and I offered the same 50,000 threshold and it was kind of scoffed at and basically said H that's nothing well it's something um and I I I draw a lot and again we're going to have a work session about Owner Direct purchase but I draw a lot of caution to allowing any individual in our district to make the independent decision that we are not going to save taxpayers money so I would like to see us add an item here um maybe it's an a because it's the superintendent or her designes Authority is where this would lie but we we create either the same threshold and just add language to expand that this isn't just for contracted services but it's also for Owner Direct purchase um or we add a separate thres a new threshold for Owner Direct purchase but I believe that there needs to be in in policy a threshold for when we don't save taxpayer dollars I agree and it's been a concern of mine um which has also been very tricky to I'll say investigate and track down um to gather that information and so uh I'm not sure how it needs to be added but I am in favor of adding language to specify as to that portion I would just ask that I would suggest the best way to add it if the board wishes to would be to add a new section under this um policy you see the sections are delineated by their bold the bold lettering um and there's various sections and that sets it off because this is a rather large policy so what I would suggest that we do is have an additional section added within that that outlines whatever language you want to see there now as to what language you want to see there um that may be relatively simple language or it's going to require some drafting for us to do right now on it so um what what's your pleasure um one concern I have is I don't I don't want it to be by item um because I don't want it to be um we we can skip over this because it's $449,000 this month $49,000 next month so I would like there to be uh maybe per per incident per contract well but POS come through as POS and so the ODP is processed I've been doing a little research on ODP so the way I understand it is ODP is processed based on a purchase order the purchase order May encapsulate one item it may encapsulate lots of items it just depends on but it's specific for one purchase order which the purchase order is tied to a vendor and so so while I appreciate your spirit I I don't think that it's possible to delineate that deep because the the ODP is processed based on the purchase order and so I think that to me 50,000 is the max because we're talking about 6% right 6% and so um 6% of 50,000 10% would be5 is $3,000 3,000 taxpayer dollars I am not comfortable with not saving anything more than that when it is a literal matter of processing paperwork agreed I I personally am uncomfortable with it being anything but I'm willing to negotiate the threshold if it's necessary but what I know for a fact is we have some room for growth in this area and I would like to create some boundaries very welcome I have a question um what is the offset obviously I would hope everyone sitting up here uh values taxpayer dollars including our own you know when we talk about taxpayers it's it's the collective we so I'd love to get and this may not be the day to do it but since we're going to have a work session on it anyway um that's something that I would want information on you know pros and cons and if we're if we're essentially from what the way it's being described losing money in the short term then what does that is there a recapture in the long term that's the same or more you know I I just really need to be more well-versed about it um I will also say that you know when you're working on a deadline and people want things done that's not an excuse for quote quote wasting money um but it also is something for this board and future boards to keep in mind because there's a lot of competing priorities well do you want this job down job done on time or you know so I look forward to the conversation in the work session and if that is okay with everyone else to leave it like this for now I don't know if this is something that your committee is also talking through um and when is the when is this going to be a work session item have we just I was going to share thank you okay board so just to for your information the work session topic is scheduled for December 12th we have um Owner Direct purchase process scheduled for December 12th okay do we expect us to vote on policies because obviously there's a a pretty lengthy timeline to get to a vote for a policy um do we expect it to be before December 12th well it wouldn't be on this one if we're going to discuss it no well that well that's what I'm trying to ask is that whatever whatever in order for us to proceed through um here we need to achieve whatever consensus we have on each of these items Within These work sessions then those have to be cleaned submitted to Neola all that trying to do a an alteration to a policy at the last minute will be so we can have the go ahead I'm asking when are we going to when's the when are we scheduling the public hearing and like when are we voting on on policy what's the timeline H anytime after 28 days after we approve them here we have to have time for a public hearing and then notice uh for R making development and when will our next policy update be after this update generally so far we've fall in a pattern about twice a year uh because that's about all we can you know reasonably process well and if if there's a single one that's easy enough well this is so I'm just it still does take it's not a let's get it done next week it's still a matter of it has to go so the way this looks is fine with me as it's presented here to move forward this board member prayerfully hoping that we get a sales tax is not comfortable proceeding with new construction until we really figure this out and December 12th having a workshop is great part of that Workshop I would love to be included draft language about this threshold the staff can work on draft language about what this threshold would look like and present it to the board so that we can have conversation and if the board is in agreement then it can be put in a policy and either we have a special workshop for the policy or the next time we talk about policy but I would love for that Workshop to be an opportunity for us to talk about this specific language for this policy is that something that can be done Dr gullet um yes but I would like to answer this with some information for the board um Dr James so JB Pro who you um were introduced to at the last uh board meeting and you um approved contract is advising on this with the area of expertise so just wanted to make sure the board is aware of that so I want to lean on the experts to provide some some recommendations to the board yes so that would be using them as a resource having them present in that Workshop some draft language for a policy like this would be my request so that we can kind of encapsulate the entire discussion and then proceed however we want for clarity are we still we're leaving the Threshold at $50,000 there is no threshold for ODP literally we were using I think we talked about having the threshold speaks more to uh what anyone in the district can spend up to without the approval of the board less to how much much that person must or when that person must make the decision as to whether to save or not as it exists an actual expenditure is is what the thresholding and as it exists right now the superintendent design has the authority to not do Owner Direct purchase in any and all instances that they so choose and they do choose it so they exercise that right to choose it yes sir no idea what he so that's all I had on this thank you so no other modifications on 6320 we're not making modifications nope that was just the conversation so we'll talk about it December 12th understood may I ask a clarifying question because you mentioned about starting any new construction while we're uh optimistically awaiting a groundbreaking from the new high school so this board member thinks that we need to figure out Owner Direct purchase based on the information that I have gathered in my own internal investigation which I have been doing for the last couple months and I plan to have conversation with about in the coming weeks we need to figure out our Owner Direct purchase before we start spending I think the early release package is 60 something million dollars for the high school that we approved um last week and when I asked the question on record I believe there was Miss Boom boach shared something like $3 million of that is eligible for Owner Direct purchase and so 6% of $3 million is what is eligible for credit back essentially every single penny of that needs to be captured it is a matter of paperwork and so this board member feels very passionate about ensuring that we are going to capture all of that money I am delicately trying to not get into deeper discussion about this that is it's it's the purview of the board how we will proceed but we need to we need to very it would be my request that this is way before December 12th I would be cool with putting this on a work session very soon because and I realized there's work that needs to get done but that's even more concerning because if we're processing Owner Direct purchase every single day in this district and now we have to spend six weeks figuring out what we're doing for Owner Direct purchase I have concerns about that and there's six figures worth of money that has not been captured in our elementaries right now six figures understood so chair ahead of us in encapsulating this and and actually embedding it into policy can we reach consensus today to direct the superintendent the Our intention moving forward is that XYZ whatever that is and that as we're moving forward as you hear I completely Concur and I think you at least have one more so at least three of us agree at probably all five of us do we do not need to move forward with large purchases where we are essentially allowing the contractor to pay the taxes when we didn't need to do that and so without us having the ability to actually put it into policy at this juncture is it I mean do you I guess superintendent col you understand what our directive is I guess for lack of a better term and the concern because the last thing that we would ever want would be for the community to think that we don't care about saving money that that couldn't be further from the truth number one that's a terrible narrative and if there has been a concern identified which there obviously has um that things need to be put in place to make sure that this isn't happening anymore you know then that's really important is is December 12th is there a chance that we could move it up sooner in this spe of getting this addressed considering the construction environment we're in and everything that we're trying to do I'll certainly ask Bard um I know that part of that concern was we just the board just approved the um agreement for that consultant and giving them time I can't answer that for them but we certainly ask and then let us know yes certainly chair but but apart from even December 12th I mean I do think eventually the board wants to have this enshrined in policy I mean I think that we we want to get there and whatever there recommendation is on December 12th so be it that's neither here nor there to this conversation we're having right now that we've reached at least moderate consensus that's probably not that's probably oximoron but I I think I agree with Dr Campbell I think what sorry to interrupt but I think what she's trying to say is is the board willing to give direction right now that says above x amount of dollars which is what I was trying to do two or three months ago in that work session and it was just like blasphemy that it' even get brought up but we what is the what is what is the threshold because we are cutting checks well we are not the contractors are which is the problem regularly and not doing ODP and then that I guess begs the question within their contracts probably doesn't have stipulations in it that says what they're supposed to be doing subcontractors right because it's less work for them well more work for a contractor to save us money because they have to go and it's got they have to get the vendors approved then they have to get the purchase order in the right way and then they have to it's way more work for the contractor so it's not it doesn't hurt them to not do ODP yes until those same contractors go out and blast Us in the community which has happened publicly in front of me about us wasting taxpayer dollars because previous employees of the district were not doing Owner Direct purchase and so yes the con it is more work on the contractor and they don't necessarily want to do but yeah they do care when they're blasting Us in the community so I I just I had to say that because that absolutely has happened and so I completely concur that we have got to get this fixed and I will agree that we can come up with whatever that threshold amount is it may be separate and apart from what our independent adviser now recommends at some point but my concern is just because we make a directive right here if we've had contractors that we've now signed into contract that doesn't stipulate that they have to do that how valid is our opinion today if it's not actually something in policy or in the contract I don't think we'd have a situation in which we have vendors who are told that they can't that they that they're not required to do ODP if we request that Construction contract has that okay that if we request for them to do under direct purchase then we can just tell them right now they have to do it okay perfect so what's the number what again what would be the reason not to do it and and that's thank you for the a little deeper conversation as as to the why you know for me it's not about politics it's not about it's about getting to the root of why this has happened previously why it apparently has continued to happen what's in our best interest to change and that's all I care about well and I think that's what stimulated my desire for a work session because the work session will potentially air out the intricacies and our procedures which are making the process very Antiquated so in other districts neighboring districts 48 hours from po to check cut we're talking weeks in Maring County y weeks and so then weeks go by checks are not cut and then the contractor says either I can't wait I have to order this or we have instances where our staff has directed them there isn't enough time you must proceed so it's it's a multi-fold issue however our it comes down to fundamentally our processes should not take this long and if it means we need to hire a new person whose sole job is to cut look at POS and cut checks because the hangup is not really illegal legal gets the proper paperwork for the vendor they approve the vendor it's it's it's not that complicated they're just following the law but the issue is once the vendor is approved then weeks are going by and so hence the necessity for a workshop so that the board can get all of us can get as deeply briefed as I I am because I've been really focused on this but then we can try to work out what is the hangup so that we can proceed because it should not take weeks to cut checks Madam chair if I may I think um think we all agree on what we're trying to do as taxpayers um don't disagree with the board and I think it'll be helpful at the work session to reiterate some of the items I know that we've discussed publicly before because of the loan and all that process and the timing I know there were challenges even with finance and and how and the the board's direction to move forward to open these schools so I think that was a factor I'm not I'm not excusing or saying yes or no I'm just saying there there are other factors that happened in the past that you know I I think hopefully in the future won't occur but um you know trying to meet the board's expectations I think we all agree on the same I think we all agree on that right and factors and and reasons matter um and the goal would be for for that those to be taken care of so it absolutely doesn't happen in the future you know this board has been really proactive about getting things right getting things fixed trying to move as swiftly as a government entity is able to do frustratingly at times you know there's there's a lot of factors and a lot of reasons um and I'm sorry we we we absolutely are committed to not getting ahead of money that we don't have yet so that timing of that work that I did with Miss Boston Ellis and the whole team did um we don't spend what we don't have right so we have an obligation just that that's important um I think for the district and the board to to not not spend money we don't yet have in our possession so well you know just speaking as a board member I am very interested in having the the full conversation sooner than later however because that's going to create the ultimate fix yes and we're all about solving problems yes to help every student succeed yes so a purchase of $50,000 at a 6% tax rate which I don't know if that's the tax rate yeah it is it is because they don't have to pay the additional okay so at a $50,000 purchase price that saves us $3,000 per $50,000 purchase so I'm fine with $50,000 being that threshold that disc until we discuss further as long as we're not inadvertently hamstringing somebody and and that's my concern you know you're much more uh deeply versed in this it sounds like boy M James but there's others sitting up here that maybe not quite so much and it always bugged me when the people on High made these edicts and then the ones that are down in the dirt doing the work are like if they had only known this that's my that's the reason why I'm like okay I'm I'm with this but so I'm fine with $50,000 unless Dr gullet has a justification for a different number yeah I'm Bor I'm just thinking um to with regard to timing and what I what I don't know right now some of the um potential what I call unintended consequences what I can what I can tell you board I'll do is if something comes up that seems like it would be a challenge even if it there's a special board meeting that's needed because sometimes because of the posting if you're if you're okay with that then then I would request that to say due to this um matter that's been brought forward it would be over that amount of money and I'm going to request a meeting so that we can expedite that and have conversation would that be it's a good short-term solution until we can work this outs for me okay great a little more reassuring just don't want to cause another problem by trying to fix one right that's we're in agreement of $50,000,000 right now going once any purchase over that amount must be own or direct purchase any purchase over that amount must be our direct purchase all right good good good all right let's keep going we're getting there page 292 um and the only caveat I would have to that would have to be that um again if that is since this was brought up by the board if we're talking about splitting it into multiple 50s that's the other issue you've got to deal with since you're giving this if there was if there was multiple purchases which will total more than that amount per contract that that's that's another thing you got you have to consider there may be several different direct purchases Owner Direct purchases that are on a single contract and so the the question is and this is something that'll be addressed within future recommendations for policy but as for right now would it be the board's intention that it's it's per purchase or per contract and and that made those are the owner direct purchase is done by POS POS Drive the check and so right posos can't be subdivided in order to avoid a threshold in any case in any policy so yes correct so what I'm saying I I I again I'm I'm cool with 50 for now I don't think 50 is the number long term but I think 50 is creating a threshold that has not been created otherwise so let's start here if we're all in agreement and after a workshop and further deep diving we can have a deeper discussion about what it might look like in in other instances but I mean but this board member completely concurs with what you just said attorney powers that you can't be subdividing the PO so that you can avoid what we've just put in place correct and that was kind of you can't be saying okay well I have this $100,000 worth of stuff but it's actually going to be three different items at whatever no if your whole poo is $100,000 then you got to abide by what we just said it would be be really unfortunate if our staff does that they can't use PE cards either moving on okay uh 6320 was the last time I asked was about 15 minutes ago is are we done so 6320 are we done for now sure 6322 construction Contracting and building put that under to be continued PC do you have a code for that that's page 297 297 all right 6324 cone has that deartment policy number that'll be needed but youall know that yes okay 6324 cone of silence is page 303 and that also has the department policy number that's needed y 6325 procurement federal grants funds so I have a question on this one I really don't want this me the page number again please uh this is page 305 so I'm I'm curious to know on all of these changes that are being made here specific to the district taking affirmative steps to assure small businesses minority businesses women's businesses all of that basically gets kind of that we're going to do everything we can to make sure that this grouping of classifications of businesses are essentially considered first and there's a lot of nuances to what is written here about that my question is and this is for both attorneys is this case law is this federal law what's causing this change this is with the same group of updates from the federal government and their requirements okay because it it is putting a a lot on us I guess but again it's for federal grants and funds but it is certainly putting a lot of establishment for us to abide by um assuring that small businesses minority business business women businesses veteran owned businesses labor Surplus area are solicited whenever they are potential sources so like we are making every effort to ensure that we are incorporating all okay if it's federal law it is what it is but it it's just seems like it's a lot to be asking to make a priority whereas if I was in one of those categoricals I would probably do everything I could to be seeking the business as opposed to the business having to seek me but and this again is an Office of Management and budget uh update as as attorney Blackman pointed out um it goes back to they Revis their guidance and uh to CFR the code of federal regulations specifically because they wish to put their clarification or interpretation on um the office management budget did that is on um incorporating statutory requirements and administration priorities reducing agency and recipient burden and clarifying sections that recipients or agencies have interpreted in different ways so where there was perhaps room for interpretation before they wanted to they wanted to narrow it based not on necessarily the law but on the Office of Management and budgets guidance practices and procedures which agencies have in the past had some you know some large ability to do now that that's that's diminishing with new Supreme Court case law but as of now that's that's what's left with this with this update so that's why these were there was there there seems to be a lot of attention on the on the uh affirmative steps to assure that small businesses minority business women's businesses enterpris Enterprises veteran own businesses that all those things are are properly spelled out within within the policies so um you know where we accept medal Federal funds we accept provisions and terms and agreements that the federal government says we must so moving on 306 okay 33 actually 6326 bid protest page 313 6330 acquisition of professional architectural engineering landscape architectural or land surveying services this is Page 316 and I do have a question on page 317 this is under number seven I'm just curious as to the amount change here so this is definitions is a we're under number seven the continuing contract we're changing an amount here uh and I'm just curious as to why change in statute and it's now going to be attached to an inflation so 7.5 million is the statute change that's correct want 3.5 million yep and what that means just as your resident person who's been doing research on this what that means is any project under 7.5 million will not have to go out for bid and they will essentially get to pick from the list except there's no rolling tally of who gets chosen so you may see notice there's common names getting chosen for projects and how are they chosen they're just on continuing contract so they're on the list of pre approved there's no rotation there's no there's no competition or anything no because they're all on the pre-approved vendor list so they're a pre-approved vendor that goes through the pre-approval process but then someone in our staff gets to decide who gets what project because they're on because it's under the threshold it doesn't go out for bid and so now the threshold because of inflation has gone up $3.5 million to 7.5 and and honestly the essentially the same amount of projects are encompassing 7.5 because covered dining is you know a classroom Wing is still more than 7.5 now so the big projects quote un quote are not included but there is no rule about how now I'm sure someone will say well we have procedures about blah blah blah but if you look throughout our district and who is getting awarded the small projects there are common names attached to the projects which used to happen in the larger projects um and then an audit occurred and we had to adjust things to get out of that so I wonder in this um example of now the smaller companies there is a possibility of that a lot of too much reusing is is that something that is auditable attorney Powers would that be the check and balance because this doesn't really make sense to me I mean I'm a capitalist I like competition you know just because you're on a list I don't know that's and that's thing there is no because you're on the list it's just the list and anyone who's on the list gets could be chosen once twice as many times someone complain and say there is a a repeated and frequent use which is shutting out these veterans and other people yeah I mean it's it's certainly auditable I mean it's it's I don't know that that it's what it took to change it before right but and the board of course when the board is performing uh its audits through the a through the auditor that reports directly to the board or is supposed to report directly to the board could do this board chooses priority of what it wants to audit so I'm thinking right in your head yeah so where the board chooses priorities that it doesn't wish to audit at this time and instead chooses other priorities then those are the priorities that get the attention until you choose the priorities that you wish to be yeah something for the board to consider because if if this is something we hadn't had to face before then it's something truly to keep an eye on uh to me it done past smell test but agree and and I'll point out that those may be very separate from you know the items that operations chooses for its review and its audits because the board independently has a duty to audit things that the board comes the board's attention they believe you know need to be reviewed right completely within your power yeah and that being said you know when you do great work for the district um that should also give you an opportunity to continue to do great work so it's balance all right well that's new news not great news next is uh six 550 travel and expenses I just have a quick question page 321 last the the green that's there so it says travel costs may be may include the transportation lodging assistance yes so she switch from screen to screen and related items incurred by employees who are in travel status of official business of the district does travel start at your home or does travel start at a mcps work site we have a who depends on what your what Your assigned site is that's how I always had to do it like if it was from ESC in the Portables that's where I started from and even if I lived in when I lived in Fort McCoy it would have behooved me to would have helped me you know to start from Fort McCoy but we weren't allowed to do it then I don't know what it is now I can't cite it so perhaps uh the superintendent can but there there is currently there's procedure as to where the travel starts right um and it's not from the place of the employees choosing it's I don't I don't recall I mean I I I think I've only used it on one occasion myself so I don't I don't really recall but there was they actually you put in the two points and it tells you this is the mileage that the district will pay M my question is can you travel does your tra can your travel start from your house as board members it can because I asked when I first got on the board because we don't have an assigned site I thought it always so mine's always from home I'm I'm lost in because I always thought for board members just started from the district office he oh he's saying they can't I'm sorry I always thought as a board members start from district office yeah that's what I was initially like as a board member are we allowed I mean obviously we're unique but I would not want something afforded to us that's not afforded to staff staff and so I realize we don't have a work site but one I I don't know I feel like the rules are different for different players so clarification would be good definitely need so if I um paragraph one speaks to I think broadly your question because we follow Federal guidance mileage paragraph one of what no reimbursement shall be paid for travel between an employees's home and his SL her official headquarters about that an employee okay mileage shall be computed mileage shall be computed from the official headquarters of the employee to each destination or from initial destination to subsequent destinations that's what I was always told that it started from the district office correct so then yeah whatever so District headquarter or your school like for example we have staff that work at different sites so Tuesday Thursday their designated site is one location to simplify it and then Monday Wednesday and Friday it's a different but it's it's that's their location that's their work location for that day yep but you're correct um Reverend Cummings the the reason I'm bringing this up is there have been instances in the last two years where we assigned individuals to like program specialist they're doing three days at North Maran and um middle and three days at lakee middle I'm thinking you have one individual who does social studies she didn't get paid to drive from her house to North Mary middle and and then she didn't get paid to drive from her house to Lake we middle those two schools are in very different places in the county and she was assigned to work at those two different places and she drove her personal vehicle because there's not a district vehicle for her to drive and she was a signed that um I'm not going to say against her will but like she wasn't a part of the decision right this the decision was made from her superiors their superiors last year last year you'll remember we pushed a lot of program Specialists out into schools and so they were pushed out into places that may very well not be close to their home and they were not able to calculate Transportation because they're driving from their home to the work site that they were assigned to if that's the rule that's the rule but then that rule should apply to us too and we should not be able to get mileage from our homes to to this work site as an example or any other school if we're driving from our home to a school as a board member because how is the rule different for us if because it is different if you look at item two that explains that M's position the official headquarters of each board member shall be his or her official residence and all authorized IND District mileage shall be computed from such headquarters to each destination and I I had read that years ago but I I do understand what you're saying board member James because uh you said program specialist is the title you referencing right yeah like so so last year when we had the teacher vacancies we pushed all the program special that in the fall and right and they were at places that may not have been close to their home correct and so they didn't choose that site to work right right what I'm thinking back on is that um our and my question would be our program Specialists are they District employees and if they are at least that's how it always was for me as a behavior specialist my mileage came from and it was kind of a bummer because my office was in the portable city right behind Hillcrest which L you know of course I could walk there so I wasn't getting anything to drive from Anthony yes down to Hillcrest every day because I was assigned to the district so the best I could have done no I couldn't even done that because my district headquarters was literally the ESC portable ghetto so I just I I think that there is work to be done here especially when we change an employees work location to support the work of the district I mean I believe in what was done was done to support student learning so I'm not discrediting that that work was done for that reason but I I struggle with telling people they have to drive their own car and they can't get mileage and we assigned their and we told them they had to go there yeah and then like um rcs's are they still resource compliance Specialists the staffing specialist from back in the day um sometimes you would end up being reassigned you know a different School say for conversation Greenway Elementary and again driving from Anthony over to Greenway well your mileage starts at your headquarters which was again the the Portables over by Hill crust and it's so that was all the mileage I could count because if I'm a teacher who chooses to go take a job at Stanton Wale and I live in Anthony that was a choice I made but when the choice is made for me by a superior that my work site is changing yeah that there is a difference there and we're not currently deline between that because I don't think we ever have the only reason that I would have pause to consider that is how high do you take the job classifications where you make that change because the superintendent has the purview to say principal of Fort McCoy School you are now the principal ofen dellan whatever they live in Fort McCoy right or wherever they live it doesn't matter where they live honestly that is neither here nor there because there are so many people that live in so far away from where they work it's crazy in this District when you start actually delving into what that looks like um but at what level do you say okay all of these job classifications and Below or whatever because principles and assistant principles absolutely would still qualify for what you're saying that we would now give them the ability to receive some kind of compensation because we now have moved a principal or an assistant principal and they weren't to go there I don't disag if they did not apply for the job and they got moved I don't disagree that that because we have many times where principls or assistant principes or directors or whatever they don't get asked what do you want to do do you want to go do this they get told this is going to be your job next year and they get moved and no account is taken to where they live or any of those pieces and so I I think that if you get if the district the superintendent or designate determines that your job is changing and your work site is changing there should at least be a period of time where you are allowed to account for travel because you that wasn't a choice you were making you didn't apply for the job to me it's totally different if you apply for the job if I apply for the job and take the job just like a teacher or an AP who live who lives in Port McCoy but once to work at dellan that's great but if I get moved there or placed there I I'm just going to disagree because I think it's a precedent that is really beyond the scope of what we understand what that could look like be because I completely I I think in the financial times we're in today that we certainly want to help our employees as much as we possibly can but that mileage rate continues to go up every year and federal law continues to change what that rate is and I I really don't perhaps let's get a calculation of how much money we would actually be saying that we would be giving to our employees I I appreciate the sentiment certainly of saying said employee you've now been asked to work in XYZ location and uh sorry it's so far away from where you live what if that person is in the process of moving to where yeah I so like at what What's the statute of limitations on how far back we go how long we do it I mean there there's just a lot of nuances to that and excuse me what if that person is being moved because of some minary type right I have an issue with that well and I'm not dying on this hill it's just something I wanted to bring up because I just felt like the rules are different for us they are and they can always run for Schoolboard sure and make starting teacher pay that's right that's right absolutely starting teer pay that's it I just I wanted I guess at a minimum to highlight that like I can see that there's an inequity there and if we can't figure out how to meet it right now that's okay or ever but I I'm I'm just not completely on board with it personally and it kind of just bothers me especially in a district oh go ahead sorry I was just going to say and and not for today further down the road but you know maybe there's because I understand what Dr Campbell shared also you know we don't know what that looks like but maybe in the future there's some sort of allocation if you are moved without a disciplinary you know infraction the the first year before you have a chance to make changes you you know there'll be XYZ and so that's something just to you know some sort of compromise that we could look at down the road not for today because our district Inc comass is a really large geographic area and that you know a little year and a half that you were down in uh Belleview High School um board member James that was the year where there were like 153 of you or something you know I remember your face on the wall and I even asked I said well she's in she lives in Anthony she's being transferred down to Bell you know you have kids you know North Maran high is right down the road I mean in terms of the common sense of it I get it so I just wanted to know that I did have a but I just I just think that it's it's valuable to at least acknowledge it and if there's a way to figure it out especially when like what if the employee says like thinking back to last year program specialist what if they said I don't have the gas money to do this that's very valid because in today's economy that's for real for people and then what so when the when the employees task their their job duties are other duties as a sign so it's within their job description and we're allowed to tell them that that's their new job but we're not providing them a car or gas money and then the employee fails to meet the expectations of their job then what so I it's it's a larger convers that we certainly don't need to digress in any further but yeah well it's interesting conversation because there's you know anything that's brought up that we can try to help our employees I'm certainly you know all for having the the discussion um the good news is is that we do have a lot of positions you know and there's opportunity if that's something that does become a hardship but we would like to avoid putting hardship on our employees whenever we can so yeah thanks for bringing it up y anything else from any no right page 325 6661 instructional materials allocation page 325 oh oh yes sorry all right if there's nothing further we're moving on into the 7000s we're almost to nine 7,000 uh 7100 facilities planning so this has to do with sorry this is Page 327 so the changes here have to do with hurricane evacuation shelter and whenever we're building Etc I'm just curious as to the timeline of us approving this policy what the current division of Emergency Management plan says is there a deficit that exists in Hurricane evacuation shelter I'm just concerned about the timing of when we approve this policy and what the current division of Emergency Management plan says do we know the answer to that because if if we don't we need to know the answer to that because if currently there is a deficit it will change our future building plans in mid policy yeah there background notes sorry um background notes are the revisions policy 7100 are based on amendments to Florida statute 1013 385 which was Senate Bill 7002 previous specific areas for flexibility are replaced with standard uh to provide a school with the ability to operate in a facility on the same basis as a charter school um Charter Schools may but are not required to follow srf however any exception to specified design criteria for Hurricane evacuation shelters must be with concurrence of local emergency management agency or the division of Emergency Management okay so again the question is what does the division of Emergency Management currently say is our shelter capacity in Maran County and does a deficit exist because if a deficit exists then we may be required to ensure that as we're building new schools I don't think we have a deficit I think we used to that's my question this provides us with the flexibility going forward but I agree that this because the laws change just gives us new flexibility but it doesn't mean we're necessarily doing anything with it right now it's more of getting ahead of an issue going forward okay I again if we have a sales tax that's approved and we approve this policy in the next four to six weeks what does that do to us I'm going to take um your question and answer it from my perspective of numbers so I know from working with Preston Bolan um from division of Emergency Management locally that he keeps a list and that's that's his duty to do that and actually uh made a recommendation to the state to decommission a building a school um so in terms of numbers we had more than we needed but that doesn't speak to the need for a special need shelter which we do not have outside of within our walls of our schools so I don't know if that answers your question but I can tell you that um his recommendation was to decommission one of our schools okay and that yes I I agree with that I I believe that his recommendation based on current numbers but as we were in the EOC very recently I feel like he is saying and maybe I heard something differently than the rest of you but but the numbers that the state says we need are frankly inaccurate based on where we are and how many people might come here in the event of major activity and so I appreciate that he has said to decommission I appreciate that he has said yes that one is on the list but we're not going to use it on purpose I appreciate all of that and our shelters were not at capacity by any stretch this time around I just want to ensure that we are not going to put something in Poli policy that is going to put a damper at all on our future building plans or if it does then we need to know what that looks like but obviously concur we need a special needs shelter that is in the county and the state I think would agree with that as well not a school that's not a school well and that's what what we heard them say from the state level when we were at the EOC is mar and County basically okay cool give us the money and we'll build a an awesome Community Center that o couples as a shelter pickleball courts and horseback ride and a swimming pool I love all of it may even spend the money so yeah let's get a special appropriation and and we will build it think that might actually be a conversation that could be happening as we speak so good okay that and clarification on the chaplain stuff yeah good luck page 329 policy 7310 7310 disposition of surplus property 744.301 public records P 335 8330 Student Records page 338 you're down to four tabs Missy 8405 School Safety and Security page 348 8406 report uh let's see hang on I do have a question on that one it's the very last um page uh so this is Page 355 actually is my question on School Safety and Security uh the progressive discipline piece to this that's being added says each district school board and Charter School governing board shall adopt a progressive discipline policy for addressing any instructional personnel as defined in that statute and any administrative Personnel is defined in Florida statute who knowingly violate school safety requirements my question is is that cross referenced in any of our employee conduct policies if so please include policy numbers with this because this is in the safety and security policy about Progressive discipline for employees who knowingly violate school safety but if we also don't have that cross referenced in the employee conduct policies we need to ensure of that and then I'm assuming it already is cross referenc but those policies were not for us to review so if it is cross reference terrific please add the policy numbers yeah that's a big one makes sense yeah that that is a big one and and we would want all of our employees to be very very well aware that should be part of the new board or new training right you know I mean I appreciate certainly maybe is may it it may be andrin I didn't it'll be good to know that it is all I did was review the policies in this notebook in the last couple of days I did not review all of our existing policies so my assumption is that is enshrined already in policy if it's not it needs to be and Y because if they knowingly violate school safety requirements and we have Progressive discipline it almost seems impossible that anyone would knowingly do that I mean talk about a direct ticket to but strange things some sometimes people would knowingly do it knowing it would be a violation but still choosing to do it for whatever reason thinking they're not going to get their hand slapped I mean I there's there's a recent instance maybe that you think you're protecting a student by doing something that is a violation of policy that would be deemed a school safety issue right so you may still choose to do that believing it's not yeah you're not going to get caught but because you have a huge heart for the kid right yeah so anyway I just it's a cross referencing thing from my assumption again is that it's already enshrined in some other policy somewhere but I can yeah I I just can't imagine that this would be the only section that we would mention Progressive discipline for employees that would violate safety okay anything else no not on that one GNA make sure it's in all the ones that address the others yeah I think I think Terry's Takens the notes to do that cross of policies are I think what Dr Campbell is saying though is not every policy we have is being reviewed today and so she's saying is this Progressive discipline policy mentioned in all policies related to is that what you're saying not just ours there both and so that this Progressive discipline Clause be added specifically to any other employee conduct that would reference something that would be the reason for Progressive discipline so that's it has not been added because Neola didn't suggest an update for those particular ones and and we would be unable to add it without taking all of those policies separately because we've advertised for this Ru making development only yeah well this would be for the future that well fine so if we can't do that then please add policy numbers that reference that already reference employee conduct and Progressive discipline and put those here if there's something already in policy about Progressive discipline am I making sense there like feels like that this right here we have the statutes who knowingly violate school safety requirements please reference policy number blah blah blah blah blah whatever that is because there has to be a progressive discipline policy there has to be some employee conduct policy there has to be something this can't be the only place we're mentioning this it just can't be it doesn't make any sense we're adding one Clause to the entire policy book about how an employee needs to have conduct about safety come on niola do better that's all that sound that's ridiculous now 101 2.01 is referenced in all of the employeed um policies in existence but it does not have a specific okay well we perhaps it's something we address tomorrow whenever you guys go back and talk to staff or whatever you need to do in the next couple of hours but you understand my question about this one Clause only being in this one policy like that's just I think what they're saying though is that we can't like this that's for the next update the next update will pull the rest of the policy it may or may not but what I mean is if it's in policy one time it doesn't need to be policy 14 times unless those other policies are altered by it and where where 101 2.01 is already mentioned in those other policies those other policies may you know may address that but um if you're wanting to go back and add the language of progressive and discipline shall be used in a number of policies first of all most disciplinary procedures are procedures they're they're a procedural element so that that's and I'll allow attorney Blackman to speak to that if he wishes but that's so our our employee or Progressive discipline policies are much more broad than the uh than the specifics that would be enshrined within procedures appreciate it sorry sorry my my question therein lies though as long as we have stipulated in some other employee conduct policy somewhere about violating school safety requirements because that's what this is specifically speaking to do we reference school safety requirements anywhere else for employees because why are we acknowledging that they may have Progressive discipline for violating school safety requirements if we haven't told them anywhere else that they have school safety requirements that's my point that it just and I think the reason the only reason I can foresee is that that is required by um that's required by the update is to say that we're not necessarily going to treat every incident that could be a Safety and Security as something that immediately results in you know a termination so it still is subject to Progressive discipline and then from there the progressive discipline um procedures would dictate whether it is a you know sort of more egregious violation or not I would presume we do have procedures that have been developed for this as well and training has gone out to all the principles as well I understand the concern but my understanding is the statute required to say that we have a policy for Progressive discipline as Mr power suggested that it's not something that you can be immediately terminated for on the first offense so it's stated here but it should also be stated elsewhere Miss Mar emailed me the procedures that have already been created in anticipation of this policy as well so it thank you it just whenever we have so many of our policies that are cross refer time and time and time again we've got them in instructional Personnel we've got them in administration we've got them in all these things and we just throw in a clause in one policy specifically about employees violating school safety requirements that causes me pause and I think that that's a misstep but we can move on I I see your point no I know I know it's a it's a Neola thing I'm not I'm not please understand no no no I'm not accusing you all I already said Neola do better I already said I I just it's it's I I appreciate us putting it in policy because we're required to do so but if we have chosen the model that we've chosen to have each subsection representing different classifications of individuals that are employed by us right but with 7,000 specifically the 7, thousands are property so they're speak this is speaking to it from a property and security issue and it's not speaking to it necessarily from a in the the three that typically overlap our non-structural instructional Administration and so those are the ones that are most frequently cross referenced between one another um so I can look into it for future updates and I think that Mr Blackman can can do the same looks like he's got some information from Miss Morant uh okay and I can I can reach out to niola and say hey this is a concern and that'd be great like to have yeah it does seem a little weird it's just this little ation of this so thank you yep well heard all right policy 8406 page 356 oops my next one is 9200 so just for the those keeping track at home so the one we're on right now is 846 page 356 406 reports of suspicious activity and potential threats to schools 8407 safe School officers page 358 8415 emergency and crisis management page 361 8420 Emergency Management emergency preparedness and emergency response agencies page 364 I'll rely on someone else for the for the policy 8510 Wellness I did have one I think it's a scribner's error on this one page 369 uh the second paragraph last sentence in a healthy school meal environment I believe instead of a health School Meal environment yes y second paragraph last sentence why there's in green already go at the top very very top yep right there second paragraph Yes healthy school meal environment y okay thank you didn't know we had a health school I didn't either uh I have another that's kind of a procedure thing I it's just I'm G to mention this and then we're going to move on page 371 specifies that students shall be provided access to free drinking water during designated lunch and breakfast meal times currently in process the way this is working at least in some schools is that students are not able to get up and fill up their water bottles at will they do have to request that permission to be granted and I don't know if this policy is going to now give the students the ability which I frankly would agree with to go fill their water bottle if it is empty um but anyway that's just a comment really more than a policy change um and then the last comment on this particular policy just kind of threw me off uh let's see on page 373 which is item all these letters and numbers I don't even know how to tell you it's in green it's g i just when I read this it kind of threw me off to say no school sponsored fundraisers which include the sale of food items will be permitted to occur until 30 minutes after the conclusion of the last designated meal service so that essenti means all of our dut fundraisers that happened during breakfast will have to go away well this is and it's interesting because like this is already a practice so I know that like um a federal manager it's not about it's yeah like this is already happening and honestly it's not um it's the the way I've seen it in practice is because Dr crell are you saying they're selling donates Donuts during breakfast I don't know I yeah so I don't think they are because they're they should not be they're that's already a practice we have is basically if you do like a bake sale or something you have to do it like at dismissal you literally can't do it anymore anymore anytime it's very sad yeah that's just sad I okay we can move on yes and I totally agree I'm almost positive that's federal guideline federal guideline and I I lamented when that went away been around a long yeah okay moving on you made a lot of money on dill pickles and PS procedurally I disagree with students not having the availability to fill up their water bottles when they need to during lunchtime let's say that which section is that we it's it's not something we can change I don't think because it's probably something in federal law it's in section c well just because we must allow access page 371 um doesn't mean that we can't Define that if that's something that the board wishes to do um but that may also be more of a school-based or procedural matter for principal decision or or for superintendent and it probably is a principal decision that you have to and so students just aren't so well yeah because like I mean because then you're you're delineating whose water balls empty or not empty and then it just really you get into the weeds and all of a sudden Little Johnny's running around and and I can I can appreciate all of that I'm just telling you especially whenever students get older they're not getting up to fill up their water bottle so they're going throughout the day without water and that's fine it it just it's what's happening I'm just you don't have to has permission to get up in in high school to fill water in Middle School you do oh in Middle School you Middle School you do I can assure you of that because that's what's happening right now my my child is not drinking think about it globally you have to think about what that looks like every single day hey Dr James is going to fill up her water bottle I my water bottle is getting low and I have something to tell her so I mean you have to I understand I'm just telling you got to teach long division and the student wants to get up and fill their water they have opportunities all through the day to fill them but they don't that I I I have to say it again it's during lunch specifically so during lunch is the only time they have to fill up their water bottles and in order to get their water bottle filled they have to ask permission to go to the water fountain to do that during lunch and that's not okay with me so I'm just SCH going on the record that's in Middle School happening right now I can tell you so I just superintendent gullet you've heard my consideration I I do not agree with that because students are going day the whole day the rest of the day after lunch without having especially if they're drinking that water during lunch but why aren't we teaching students to just advocate for themselves to advocate for themselves so that they don't have to raise their hand no to say hey I need water and and in practice certainly but you know middle school kids are also not doing that either because they don't want to be the one that has to well I think there we got to teach a little bit of you got to self advoc yeah you got to self Advocate you thirsty you're not going to die without water all day I mean they came to school with water in the water bottle they're not going to perish so if you're thirsty you got to raise your hand and ask permission I just I don't think they had invented water bottles when I in school there was a meme that says we they had just invented water when I went to school if the janitor was water and something you just drank out of the hose especially if you were on the playground policy 8600 page 875 well I guess you're ready to move on I'm ready to move on and I don't have any more tabs so I got I'm done I got just two more you have one right there it's 9200 we already did it 8600 Transportation page 375 uh next one is unnumbered proposed AI policy that's page 382 9 99211 parent organizations booster clubs and other outside support organizations would did we skip 9200 I only want 9200 just to make sure we Chang 9200 volunteers we we did okay yep got it thank you um 9700 I'm sorry let me double check 9211 parent organizations booster clubs and other outside support organizations 389 9700 relations with special interest groups AG 393 9800 Charter Schools page 397 so I just I so this is my last one and it is the last one what in God's green earth occurred because we cut through we they've stricken through everything what page you on Sir well it's basically 397 to 415 it's 20 Pages yeah and we've struck through like everything yep and not added a whole awful lot so where did we add had all of the stuff we struck through or is it not necessary anymore I did the revisions to policy 8510 are based on dialogue with the Florida Department of Agriculture and consumer services and the agency's recommendations also no I'm on 9800 9800 I'm sorry so I was like agriculture yep I just looked at the wrong sorry about that attorney Blackman do you know what the changes were to statute there was a Neola says in light and frequency of revisions needing the policy of um 9,800 the lack of flexibility for school boards to adopt policies related to the charter schools and the reality that most Charter Schools issues are specifically addressed in Florida Statutes State Board of Education rules and Charter agreements Neola has decided to significantly revise a policy of 9,800 by removing Provisions that merely restate portions of the statute and that my understanding is as well the statute changes often and they had to keep updating it every time and since it's a statute there's no need for it to be in polic so we're referencing the statute and eliminating all of the nuances referencing the statute corre clarify that's from Neola from niola that was their recommendation and I had Mr SS review this as well and he agreed as well with this okay that's fine it just it was very substantive there was a lot going on so I wanted to make sure I understood there's a lot of strike through yeah deregulation is startling we're not we're used to getting more and more ated not this is gone so if we're can we obviously attorney Powers is going to recap I personally would like if we need to take like an an hour break and come back I would rather come back today than have to come back tomorrow there is nothing we have to come back for okay good yeah we knocked it out so we're done we are done with policy review I for the moment get legal drafting done now yes wonderful yes so very attended very engaged a plus anybody aware is anybody aware attorney Blackman I'll ask you the superintendent and board members is there any policy which we touched on that we edited today that was uh I I did not have any indication of anyone that needed to be Revisited tomorrow I don't what's this tab if not is there anything I agree I I don't have anything that we were going to bring back and if not we will go start work on draft these and getting them ready to get yeah you we'll go back and and start processing is the plan still to pull the chaplain's bill to a like separate item when we get to the vote no if we're going to do that we need to do that today and create two separate policies will be duplicative the the volunteer policy volunteer and School Chaplain when it goes to the agenda for that spe for us to approve all the policies and then approve that one separately that's what I'm saying oh yes I understand now yes a different item yes so be it would be under discuss that is the only policy which we which we would have a potential dissenting Vote or well I don't want to say but that that was expressed that that might be something that we need we want to do so yes we can set that on as a separate item okay and I also wanted to clarify just because the only one that I had an additional tab on was policy 2415 that has completely been stricken I just want for superintendent s okay that's tutoring for credit so we're not altering all of the existing tutoring policies and we are are not including policy 2415 that was tutoring for credit okay it's struck all right all right well great job everybody thank you for your diligence we'll move on to board committee reports and concerns I'll start with a few meeting reminders um and we don't have to worry about this now because the additional special administrative briefing work session scheduled for tomorrow morning at 9:00 amm is cancelled all right a special board meeting has been scheduled for November 7th 2024 at 7:30 a.m. the next administrative briefing and work session has been scheduled for November 7th 2024 at 9:00 a.m. the next school board meeting is scheduled for November 12th 2024 at 5:30 p.m. all right Miss Martinez anything from your seat no Madam chair thank you attorney Blackman no thank you Dr gallet nothing thank you thank you uh Miss Brown all right attorney Powers give Miss Brown another opportunity if there's anything you wanted to go ahead and did is there any PR you want to bring she hates talking in public so I'm just messing no nothing nothing for me thank you all right thank you uh board member Campbell muling it over well I'm I'm trying to decide if I want to speak to the email that we received yesterday from attorney Powers but I I think we might just save that um specifically referencing the interlocal agreement and the special use permit and I'm working on uh with Mr Minter on uh drafting final Arrangements we had the so there's a timeline we had a um there was a a local a Ila specifically specific to school CCC and the special use permit requires that that interlocal agreement be put into place prior to uh construction commencing so in order to achieve that um there are things within the special use permit that were required there is a list of six a through D I think and you saw that in the technical working group notes that I sent all of you um those items were I I I placed that information exactly as was within the special use permit drafted that and sent that to the county to review now um a couple of hurricanes of course happen in in the meantime and also uh M Mr M was also on vacation right Mr M was out for a while I got a response back on the 24 on the 24th that indicated that here was some additional um uh edits to add I believe the majority of those edits are pretty helpful and and useful and are not you know problematic um there are a couple of areas that will require um a little bit more um edit the response to Mr Mentor so as soon as I get done with things here one of my phone calls to make to Mr Minter about those particular things um there are three items which will require further potential consideration with facilities and that is um one of them is uh that the county had expressed that it wishes to have of course all of the conditions special use permit met prior to the construction commencing or announcement of groundbreaking however um at least one of those items a photometric plan which essentially deals with light light pollution um that will not be available for some time um facilities informed me that yesterday so that is something that's going to be um that that is something we're going to ask for the county and I'll I'll discuss that ask for them to allow that plan to be completed while instead prior to the installation of the actual lighting that may cause such source pollution however not necessary at this moment another uh has to do with still one uh discussion regarding the uh the buffer a buffer zone of or I'm sorry an easement Zone 120t versus 130 ft I met with facilities yesterday immediately uh with Miss bomach um immediately after their engineers and uh Miss bomach had met with County officials as well or County uh employees County staff to go over um traffic study impacts because that was another large thing as well we will be in compliance with the interlocal agreement that I drafted so long as we actually do indeed um have that submitted um my the report that I received was yes every all that data has been submitted so there are um just a couple of areas that need a little further tweaking or a little further um uh agreement um not implying that every one of them will be simple but they are at least straightforward um as far as how I you know whe whether or not the County agrees to to those those things uh I will state that the edits that I received back from Mr Minter um those are ones which uh throughout the agreement um it does indicate uh a desire to assist us in achieving a rapid resolution and being able to get a 2026 deadline in fact one of the edits I got to make is in the document it said 2025 that's incorrect it's 2026 so um I'm hopeful that over the next couple of days here since I now I'm not going to be at a policy review all day that I can finalize some of those things um the county has indicated to us that uh they would attempt to push this through to a walk-on item for 115 if that's the case and then um if not they would put it on their I think it's 1112 was the 19th or 19th okay so um I know I note that during the uh technical working group meeting the last time the minutes indicate that the county did request that prior to an actual groundbreaking the conditions of the special use permit be met so we do have to actually do everything within our power to at least make sure that our interlocal agreement is is set and that is you know I would say nearly there um but in order to do that it requires certain things having been completed between facilities our facilities engineers and County staff with the exception of a photometric plan and agreement over uh some buffer zone items uh those are things that I believe are largely completed um as to those issues I I could not I'm not a planner I could not tell you exactly how long those may take or whether they may result in more difficulty or not so without belaboring the conversation because I appreciate the update and thank you for clarifying one of my primary concerns just in the edited document that we receiv received that I'm assuming you're going well you've just said you're going to then respond with additional edits I have concerns about the whereas paragraph that says whereas Florida attorney general opinion ago code my question about that particular whereas paragraph is the Count's in the process of updating their comprehensive plan and I want to ensure that whatever the agreement is that we come to that we are in constant communication with the county on the updates to their comprehensive plan that they're not going to that there wouldn't be anything added into the plan as they're currently in process of updating that would impact this school or future schools and so that's my concern just even mentioning that in this interlocal agreement causes me pause well it it is controlling law because in the absence of there being any sort of a um law to the contrary or case law that's been made the Attorney General opinion does control and it actually it it works for us not against us in in the fact is that the Attorney General's opinion says we do have to comply with a comprehensive plan we knew that back in 2013 uh because during our application for the the comprehensive plan they made a factual determination at the time that it was consistent with the comprehensive plan now here there would still need to be there's a determination to be made once we've submitted that it is consistent with the um comprehensive plan now we have no indication that's not going to be the case the main part of that statute of that Flor attorney general's opinion that matters more is the second half the second half is that the uh that we are permitted to uh to make use of um of alternate means under floor building code for example and so that is one of the edits that I asked us to put in into another section there uh specifically I believe it was dealing with uh with security and buffer zones some of those indications are that statute specifically says if it can debone at as at a cheaper cost by complying with Florida building code then we can Al it's an alternative we can do that alternatively so I'm going to ask for that section to be put in to clarify exactly the issue that you bring up um but otherwise yes what's in the Florida attorney general's opinion uh on on point from I think believe 2004 uh is um I think guess explanatory and in conjunction with a couple of the things that Mr Minter put in there um I I think it sort of accurately and along with the emails that I received from miss strob it it appears to accurately reflect that they are uh going to do their best to assist us in achieving that that time frame um and of course there are a couple of items still that are remain unresolved and it's not that those those unresolved issues are as I said primarily photometric plan and agreement as to an actual buffer and that's between facilities engineers and County Engineers so so um My Hope Is that the new consultant that we've brought on board to assist us with government planning Etc is paying close attention to conversations our County commissions having about their comprehensive plan and ensuring that nothing that might be coming forth in that plan amendments changes whatever they're considering doing will impact us now or in the future so normally we would have you know we don't have an employee necessarily that's that's doing that piece for us any longer now we have a consultant who is so that is a specific request um that they are paying close attention um I I was I had a client back whenever the first amendments happened back in 20 14 that were very um interested in things that changed back then and so I know what that looks like and so I just encourage us to have a our ear to the ground and know what's going on and that somehow things we need to be done aren't written out of the plan um but beyond that uh today has been helpful and thank you to Miss Brown and all of your hard work we are grateful for you even though you don't like sitting up here with us we're super grateful for you and certainly for our attorneys and all the team that worked so diligently to get us to where we are today um I didn't feel like I had as many tabs as I normally do so we're done in a day thanks guys yes yes well we've come a long way all right for James thank you um on the same premise I'll start with what Dr Campbell was saying I have great concern about scheduling a groundbreaking when we have not accomplished everything we need to do to have said groundbreaking and I believe that's why the invitations didn't haven't gone out yet save the date went out I sent it out personally this morning um kind of as a followup to the conversation yesterday but there's been no official invitation set out for that reason calendar but yeah based on conversations I've had November 12th is two weeks from today yesterday right November 12th is two weeks from yesterday yep and this inter local has to get everyone in agreement and signatures from our chair which we've already said okay she has the authority but then it has to be signed by the county commissioner chair and have they granted her the authority to make that independent decision or not um I can share with you that um based on back and forth emails that there is an opportunity um to do that as a as a walk-on item according to um Tracy straw which was I believe November 5th November 5th otherwise if it goes to a regular uh the next regular County Commission meeting we will miss because that would be the the 19th but they commonly do walk on items so but then we're not sending out invitations until the six we would send them out the afternoon of the 5th so a week that's why the saved the date there was indication that an invitation would be appreciated um so that's why I I I mean I believe that we need to have a grandiose groundbreaking absolutely and all of the delegates there and all of it and I just I don't I I feel like we're putting ourselves in a position where if there is push back on some of these items which rightfully they could push back on like the the photo whatever study right we are just putting ourselves in not a great position because then we're going to have to say oh just kidding we're not doing it now and I just I wish we would just wait until all the components were done until we made the decision and I I appreciate that it's a save the date but I imagine we're going to forward that save the date to our state reps and other important delegates in our community and then to have to pull back and basically say just kidding right and I would not mean to imply in any way that those last few items which are brought up to you are things that would that are I mean they are the last standing things in a in a long process that's that's gone on between County County engineers and and our us and our Engineers I don't mean to imply that those are you know just easy Parts those are just last part standing there are a couple that do appear to be relatively solvable now as far as the portion that I can do with with drafting of the legal language everything I everything can be done very quickly but I'm not trying to say that people are not working incredibly hard and fast I'm just saying it causes me pause to to essentially schedule something that we don't have we're not we're not we're not ready to schedule yet we haven't we have not gotten to finality to schedule it and so I cannot predict how long how how much long it will take for those departments to have those some of those issues and I I understand that lots of people will be at of groundbreaking and it's quite I mean this is a high school it's a significant event for our community and I just wish that we had all of our boxes checked before we were moving forward with scheduling so that's my thought on that um I I think similar to some of you had a discipline briefing with Dr henbrook and attorney Blackman and I have been asking the same question for I don't know at least the last six weeks which is I want a very clear definition of what gets you without services and I have yet to receive that and as a board member this board member is not going to vote on without Services until I get that clarification because what I what I know is the data about the type of student that is receiving without Services is not varied it is the same type of student and until there is a very clearcut decision tree of what code gets you without services or what access or where those actions occur I do not feel comfortable continuing I am in full support of exposure without services in full support but the decision tree as to how we get to that consequence is not clear and one of the words I that was used yesterday was principal discretion I'm so sorry but I do not think principal discretion is appropriate when we are talking about expelling students without Services there should be a code and the code should determine the cont consquence we should not have human implicit bias indicating when we do or do not use discretion for a student's consequence and that is my opinion but I feel very uncomfortable continuing to proceed with expulsions without Services until we have clearly identified how we land at that consequence and I am not settled with the information I received yesterday um lastly in the board meeting last Tuesday we voted on a bus contract there were questions I asked during that meeting including what is the pay and other things I would like if Dr HR or whoever can provide that information to us as board members in an email as a followup that typically does occur but we have not received that information and there is narrative in the community about what they are paying um and I haven't actually received any any information about that so I would request Dr gullet if someone from staff can communicate those intricacies of those questions that I asked um I would have to go back and watch exactly to see exactly what I asked but it was about is there a non-compete what is the pay you know what are the components of this contract um for the bus drivers so so um Dr James if you can clarify you're asking for what the pay is what the benefits are and you want a copy of the contract that you approved well no I I don't what I'm asking is to go back to the meeting and if I need to do that to outline my questions I can but in the discussion for that item last Tuesday I outlined questions and they have not been answered okay Mr Christian takes notes for us of board requests and we'll retract those thank you that's all I have thank you okay thank you and I will just share that I've had some of those same questions too and there seems to be a lot of confusion you know the contract was approved for up to I think it was 1.7 million 1.6 that doesn't mean we're going to spend it all um I believe it was $25 an hour or up to 25 up to up to $25 an hour so I've had conversations in the community of okay well that sounds like a lot of money but they're not getting any benefits corre so you know um this it kind of it's like deja vu all over again you know when we had the contractor drivers previously and um there was a lot of I'll just say it you know a lot of them weren't treated very well by our own employees and they were just there to drive you know to try to help with the problem and so we do need to have as board members very accurate information because if you're being contacted and and there's complaints being made then we have to be able to share the truth and people that continue to get their truth from the parents of Marian County page well that's buyer beware right there you know you can go anywhere for information and it doesn't mean it's going to be accurate so um I agree that you know having the questions answered and having them be very direct and straightforward so that we can actually get that information out there really is important so thank you for bringing that up all right yeah along that vein um there's there's there's a lot of questions and even to the point of who's going to are are are our people required to maintenance the buses um that this company is using um I've gotten all those type of questions so we do need to clear we need need to clear the air so that our people can understand that this was like a Band-Aid this is like a temporary fix and and it's not anything that's permanent we're hoping that at some point all of our people will be driving all of our students but I think we we definitely need to clear clear the air so that um our transportation department know that we value them that we're not kicking them to the side of the gr or anything like that but we got to do something that to help our students so as soon as we can get those questions answer I think it'll it'll ease the tension that's out there that is bad information that's out there on social media so right anything else and no I don't have any comments other than um please vote please vote vote vote and definitely we got a sales tax on there so please look at that one for us so it's on the very last page please yes all those down ballot items that mean so much vote the whole ticket that's right yes yes yes I'm good okay thank you Vice chair conr I just have just a few things um I just want to thank attorney Blackman attorney Powers Miss Brown um and then at the front of of our 415 page document of policy updates there are a lot of Staff members um that stepped in to evaluate and give input on all of these things that we spent many hours discussing and um looking over today so I just want to say thank you uh for all the work you made our job easier here today so thank you um I also wanted to give a shout out we had a rock room opening at Fort McCoy last week it really was fabulous um such a great program and I'm just so thankful for for the work that they do that directly impact the students at our schools and so just very grateful um for that program and and all that they do for our students make sure to go vote on Tuesday if you haven't already and go all the way to the end of your document so you can um take a look at at things that are impacting our schools and our community um right now so that's all I have chair all right thank you very much all right well let's talk about Christmas okay I I came you're cutting off Christmas I'm so sorry gosh that's terrible timing I uh I I do have another additional announcement after we go through the Christmas no go ahead because I want the full Joy of talking about Christmas okay perhaps this could be a little uh maybe some early Christmas present I don't know but we've got um we just got additional information today at 2:00 as you Weare board was our uh receipt deadline for old old central warehouse and vacant lot properties um that we did receive a total of nine bids um five are marked as being for the vacant lot and four are marked for being for the old central warehouse um and we had in our initial paperwork that we had uh submitted we put for the advertisement of such bids we had uh said tenative Schoolboard approval is Schoolboard approval is tentatively scheduled for November 14th of 2024 so we will need to actually set an actual uh time for us to a special board meeting for us to review unseal and make some decisions based on that as well so by November 14th well it's it's a tentative tentatively scheduled date and that date has remained open so that's going to be a question for the board and superintendent now whether that's something that uh that you have availability for we have a board meeting already scheduled for the 7th that's off air but theoretically we could bring it back on air after the workshop I don't know what's on the agenda for the workshop for Thursday of next week but if it's not like one of these that we've had lately that's got 1900 things on it then maybe we could just go on air at the end of the work session end of the board meeting yeah and enter into enter into a regular board meeting because we already have a board meeting scheduled and the publication deadline is theoretically tomorrow and if not we have a board meeting on the 12th so we can at least get it in by then on either agenda correct I think there's ample time on the 7th some of the other ones are quite long okay due to timing of items but well because I would love to have time to have discussion and I feel like in an evening meeting we we you know it's it's long so if we were able to go on the 7th do the special meeting in the morning off air do the work session and then go into like maybe have lunch and then go into an on air board meeting resume it and then we could do it then but that would mean that whatever I don't know if the bids are going to be published or not but that would theoretically have to get published tomorrow right what's day what's today's day I I that is way too we're we're not I'm not going to be able to make that work the 14th would be ideal and that's what we probably need to stick to but I publication wise we have to publish today at noon was the publication deadline for the 14th correct Miss Martinez so we can't have a meeting on the 14th because we've already missed the publication deadline so we have an organizational meeting and the meeting of the leasing corporation on November 19th so that's in the midday at 11 o'clock I think is statute we have to do that so I don't know if these bids have to be a part of the leasing Corporation or not like I don't know if it's a board meeting or a leasing Corporation but all of that's happening already on November 19th so could I propose that we you know if we need to be briefed individually on something in advance or whatever that looks like but November 19th is already a set organizational meeting day that's time sensitive correct sure that the organizational meeting is yes but the leasing Corporation meeting isn't time sensitive we go into it afterwards yes you go to afterwards before it doesn't have to be that only the organizational meeting is time since we can do what we need to do either before or or after well but Elena um Miss Martinez has already submitted I imagine the advertisement for the 19th meeting is that correct so it's already been submitted for for 11:00 a.m so we would want to put it afterwards because the time is part of the advertisement correct that's fine she can do it before too correct but we'd have to pay for that the reason I asked that is because I know I have to be in Tallahasse later that evening um so morning would be better for you morning would be much better for me on the 19th yes well I mean our meeting is at 11:00 am so I that's so I mean why can't we do one in the morning let me back up and give additional information as well I'm sorry I was talking about a a meeting for the 14th okay and I'm out of town all right and you're saying that this is a 7-Day notice meeting what would be required okay so why is it that our deadline I'm missing something why is it that our publication deadline for a special for for a for a meeting on the 14th would have to be turned in by today two weeks prior we don't have your microphone I understand but if we turned it in on the 6th it runs on uh then runs on the 8th which is Friday yes so that would be then one yeah one two three four five yes okay and not that it matters but I'm at the Excel and Ed conference if we put it as a special board meeting we only need 72 hours so we can put it on as a special board meeting and still make plenty of time for publication I guess I'm so I'm just going to give you a little push back I'm sorry this going to make you feel uncomfortable what what needs to happen what are the bids getting published publicly I can't usually I would say no okay so what is going if this item were added to a board meeting for tomorrow for publication for tomorrow what is going on the meeting the board meeting for publication for tomorrow which would be the board meeting on the 7th if we if we were to expand it what is what is going up for publication on on the item for the for for these for the seal bids yeah it' be to open and improve them but I need to make sure of John of M Mr McGrath's availability it's been tentatively right now he's looking at the 14th so I need to make sure of a number of factors not just his availability but also the process I I've got there there's things that I'm not ready for and I do not want to be working on a 12h hour deadline to make stuff happen 14 so Dr Campbell's not available and I don't think it would be appropriate to have a discussion about this without all five of us being able to participate all right then the 19th is it is so can we do the 19th in the morning yes well and again I cannot tell you how long this process may take so it might be one that we are going that we want to do at the end of the board meeting or what or meetings yeah so right after the organizational meeting no Reverend Cummings has shared that he's traveling to Tallahasse that afternoon so I got you to be respective of his travel if we did it at 9:00 a.m. that would afford US two hours to have lengthy discussion about whatever and give us more than enough time to be wrapped up or go into what's the word organization yes what about the swearing in pieces you know it's that's also the time when family comes and all that good stuff but that all would be at 11 that'd be time certain 11 okay so if we start at 9: I think we can make it work yeah I mean I mean I'm available I mean we can all come prepared to take get our picture taken at 9: and then do the bids at 9: and till 11: and then do the formalities of the organization organizational and everything at 11 so does the 19th date uh make it more appropriate for you to attorney Powers makes it more appropriate for me the missing pieces here I'm informing you but I got to I'm going to need to reach out to Mr mcra as well okay so I'll keep you updated it's a board can you um just explain to me why it's a board meeting and not a work session because the board's gonna have to vote on the the winner on which bids to which bid to accept so we're making a motion on each bid or no it's there's a selection I just I think normally what I'm thinking is normally we would go through the work in a work session and then the one we're choosing would go to a meeting that's how I understand us to work typically how we work so it's just not normal for us to go through all of the Motions in a meeting the discussions you mean yes so he presents each it would be normal for Mr mcra to come and present the bids to us in a work session we all get collectively briefed on all of them we walk away we've maybe made a decision come to consensus then that individual item is put on a board meeting agenda give me available dates and I will coordinate with Mr mcra and make sure that our process is correct for it okay so so bring to a work session next week that's what I'm trying to maintain is like if Mr mcra is available next Thursday to come present the bids if what he's presenting is the bids then it needs to happen next next Thursday because we already have a work session next Thursday and the item could get added and honestly the item can get added and if we don't get it together then the item is withdrawn but I mean because I don't want to be hurrying you know this is really important and you know we say 9 o' but then and we are time certain at 11: you know that yeah and so I'm an agreement that I think it should go to the work session for next week I like that idea we come back and vote on it on the 14th yes well not the that not the four the 14th 19th not 19th 19th I'm sorry yes the 19th yes at the 9:00 meeting on the 19th well but it won't need to be a 9 o'clock meeting because there presumably we would have done the work of the discussion in the work session so it's a formality of the vote so I would say that you know it could be essentially at 1055 or 1050 or so or I mean you know what I mean like there's not going to be this need for two hours ahead of organizational masing meeting because we will have had the discussion maybe 10 o'clock you know because people have family coming and all of that so have it at 10 and then fine with that okay so at this point the idea would be to set it for a work session on the 7th add it to the work session agenda that exists yep and with the board chair's permission obviously and then uh we would be setting it for a actual meeting on the same day as the organizational meeting the morning of the morning of morning of okay so our time frame for the 19th looks like what then just I want to I think we said 10: a.m. 10 a.m. 10: a.m. and that initiates with the organizational meeting no initiates with when is the sorry I'm just trying to clarify I do have family coming I where is at 11 o'clock I thought the organizational meeting was at 11 o'clock that's the same thing it's not I'm sorry it's not the organizational meeting is when we're all sitting here at gaving in so the leas incorporation is the swearing in meeting all of that happens on the same day yes the swearing in traditionally happens first first because you have to be a board member before you can weigh in on the organization yes so that is all set for 11:00 a.m. I I don't we just have one we just have one calendar I know we have one calendar invite for 30 minutes and so I'm not really sure there's two PE there's two people being sworn in M conr and Dr Campbell correct so why can't we still do 10 o00 as just swearing in board meeting or whatever no now we were talking about doing 10 I yeah I think we're saying 10 o'clock to to vote on the bid and we may decide we're not want to bid we may say all the bids we don't want to entertain any of them and try again so it's may be a moot point but if we pick one then we're we're opening a meeting for a 10-minute quick thing and then we're closing the meeting and then at 11:00 we would do the swearing in and then the organizational meeting well it's just a matter of how quick do we think it's going to be because we try to say we're going to be quick and then it takes longer so I just again this is a big deal and we want to make sure we have enough time dedicated we also want to make sure we have enough time if if the families are going to be here to be for the swearing in you know those don't take very long but like to take pictures and stuff and then it's time certain right Miss Martinez for 11:00 for the organizational meeting so Mr Christian how long is it going to take us to do the swearing in oh that's not terribly long kind of is yeah if memory serves me correctly I believe we have done swearing ends at 10:30 those go directly into the meeting at 11: because as I understand it it is time sensitive and then your leasing Corporation meeting typically takes place after that yes it's it's your it's your meeting your agenda you can do whatever you'd like and we will accommodate thank you and invitations need to go out for the swearing in piece yes they always have in the past I believe um so we need to get those out and for 10:30 right and then do we think that meeting at 10:00 to talk about the bids is enough time 30 minutes no I do okay so we're back to 9:00 to 9 o' back to 9 o' that's what I said so the work session is the work to determine which bid we're choosing if any and then the meeting is motion to approve bid 1 two 345 for the sale of lmop and then con Junction with the meeting on the 7th you're right yeah okay okay so it's not it could take less than 30 minutes that's what I'm trying to clarify okay so 30 minutes we are good so let 10 o' is 10 o'clock is the meeting for the bids 10:30 is the swearing in 11:00 is the organizational meeting the organizational meeting which is a swearing meeting begins at 11: that is the time it has been advertised that is what has always been past practice we do the organizational SL swearing meeting at 11: we approximately finish 15 minutes after that we start the board leasing meeting at 11:15 which lasts 5 minutes we got done last year in 23 minutes between both from 11 to 11:23 but last year we didn't have a swearing in well the year that we did she starting about two years ago it's always been 11 it's never been 103 so we start we started 11 with swearing ends is that what you're saying so that is part of the meeting that's part of the organizational meeting correct okay that's what we were looking for Clarity on so this will require a new advertisement then correct for the 9:00 special board meeting 10:00 10:00 yes Jesus you guys are talking to me into confusion so 10:00 I'm just for clarity 10:00 special board meeting to discuss to vote on what we discussed at the work session discuss on the work session yes 11 o' organizational meeting with the swearing in yes once that's completed we move right into the leasing Corporation meeting correct 10 o'cl 10 o'cl 10 o' I'm pulling I'm trying to pull it up yes so advertisements um invitations would go out for still 11 o'clock and if Mr McGrath is not available I think that he needs to send he needs to be here for the voting on the 19th just no no no no no I'm talking about the sth next like to me he needs to send someone from his organization and a representative like it needs to be rather non-negotiable in my opinion so well we only have so much time and we're trying to get this done Madam chair just for clarity when you say invitations for the organizational meeting other than yourselves are you specifying other individuals to be sent invitations to no no that was ahead of the confirmation that the swearing ends are factored into the meeting that begins at 11 okay but no additional invitations no additional invitations are needed right everybody's good yeah yeah I I thought you were talking about like actual physical paper invitations and I was like I don't think we no no no no okay I was confused by that as well all right anything else that's it we're solid uh we will need to add a notice of public hearing to the 1112 board meeting for our policies um and also schedule on 1210 2024 a board meeting um for the hearing as well well there's already a board meeting that day right so we'll need to add that as an item when it comes up so I'm just announcing that publicly so uh because we have to make a public announcement when it comes to announcing a public Hearing in advance as well right okay that's all all right get to Christmas yeah let's talk about Christmas actually uh this is the only thing I'm going to have before I talk about Christmas and it is related to the um the Ila that's specific to the special use permit and so I just wanted to to share with you you know staff has been working hard County staff District staff you know to really try to work through this and and get this done and so my understanding was that everyone's working hard you know to to bridge any time lapse um that the Commissioners are certainly waiting on the Ila to be submitted you know they didn't want there to be any surprises with uh groundbreaking invitations you know being sent out without the Ila being formalized however um it was indicated that you know in invitations were definitely desired so it certainly wasn't my intention to send save the dates to everyone um it was as a result of this really pretty constant and effective collaboration that's happening um we've been talking about the date internally um for a while and it was conveyed to me that um there was the possibility of a walk-on item if we have it done to be able to get it formalized and then be able to meet our groundbreaking tentative date um if not it won't happen so uh I just hope that everyone continues with their diligent good faith effort um to get this done you know we're all excited about it uh they they need a road that is in good shape and that where traffic can flow through um hopefully with as little Interruption as possible twice a day uh we need a school and we need a road that is going to keep our kids from getting hit as they um try to get into school so you know we all have every good reason to continue to move forward with this um in good faith and get it done so there you go that's what I have to say about that all right let's talk about Christmas all right um the good news is is that the pagas once again are uh very very very kindly to have us um on December 14th which is the Ocala Christmas parade so that's a date that you can put in your calendars there'll be more information to follow is exactly what time to show up but we're all veterans now of Christmas parade so we know how to thread the needle and get there in time to hop on the float what time does the parade start I think it starts at 5:30 yeah but they always like to have us there early um so that they get started on time I do not know the dates of the Belleview Christmas parade nor the dellan Christmas parade and what I was going to propose was uh whoever is the board member whose per that parade occurs in their District if maybe they would reach out and get the details on that and share them with the rest of the board but I do know that we are armed for the Okala Christmas parade on December 14th all right all right and I think with that we'll we'll end for today we've covered a lot of ground and so I will say that we shall adjourn if no one is uh in opposition at 3:21 p.m. all right thank you very [Music] much e for