Hey. --------- I assume we'll we'll find out when we do attendance that we're all connected, so. But get the meeting to order here. We do have a quorum, at least we think so. Um [clears throat] call to order and start attendance. David starts off.
>> In a Brooks, Facilities Construction. >> Jasmine McLauren, Facilities Construction. >> Michael Aguida, Clerk. >> Holly Han, Office of the General Counsel. >> Michael Tubiolo, Facilities Construction. >> David Dolan, Facilities Management. >> David Porter, Clerk. >> Barbara Myers, Construction Purchasing.
>> Francis Macapagal Don, Clerk. >> Good. >> John Adams, Facilities Construction. >> James Bell, Facilities Construction. >> John Levinson, Rail Enterprises and Cisco Detour. >> Nish Tree, Air Traffic Construction. >> James Kennedy, Chief Operating Officer.
>> Manuel Ayala, AEGE Architects. >> Eric Bonilla, Amoroso Construction. >> Uh Colin Stevens, Vertex Construction. >> Hey, >> [clears throat] >> go on line for us, David. >> Bruce Alexander. >> Present. Good morning. >> Jim Ald.
>> Present. >> Is? >> Here. Virginia Ferris. >> Is everyone on line? >> It's unusual for Virginia not to be on. Okay, maybe not on line. I think she's on the phone with her. >> Okay.
Uh Chairman's report. Um I do have a little minor report today. At last meeting, I was asked to write to uh Mr. Lane, a board member. >> Um oh, sorry. Before you go, um Ms. Branch. >> I just want to let you know I'm on. Uh
somebody said I needed to tell you for the minutes, so I'm on. Thank you. >> Okay, thank you. >> Thank you. That's all right. So, I was asked to write to uh Mr. Lane on behalf of the board to uh encourage him to kind of uh not accept John Cheshire's resignation and urge him to come back. Um
I did that, and Mr. Lane wrote back to me a couple days later and said he had already started looking for a replacement. So that kind of told me he wasn't going to ask John to rejoin or resend his resignation. I then personally reached out to John as
well and told him all the accolades that he had been given at the court meeting. Again, I can do that because he's no longer a member. And he wrote me back a letter that he asked that I read into the minutes, which I'll do right now. So dear court members, I watched the
replay of the April meeting and sincerely appreciate the kind remarks and accolades everyone expressed. I'm truly honored. I also appreciate those of you who personally reached out and asked me to consider reconsider my decision. I spent several days carefully considering whether I should return and
ultimately concluded that the reasons for my resignation still remain. I feel that much of the time spent reviewing the items presented to us has become largely unproductive. While I believe the school district staff are highly competent, there are times when their actions should be questioned and
independently verified through a review of the supporting documentation. Too often when costs or other concerns are raised, the response is simply that the consultant has verified the costs. Primary reason I'm not enthusiastic about returning, however, is my belief that our message is not reaching the
board. Several instances over time have led to led me to this conclusion. One example was court's unanimous decision in the December 2025 recommendation to revise the points awarded for local preference in the selection of design professionals and
construction managers. Another example involved court's concerns regarding proposed policy changes by staff that were never communicated to the audit committee or the board even though both specifically asked whether court had approved the changes. These experiences have caused me to
question whether the board truly values court's recommendations to the extent we have been told. I've also I also want to address the statement made during the April 30th meeting regarding the court's handling of the pre-construction contract the court voted against.
I had cited that matter as an example of the board not listening to court because the item was not removed from the consent agenda for discussion. Mr. Sanchez stated that I had the option of speaking with my board member, Mr. Lane, and asking him to pull the item for discussion. However, I and I believe
most court members assumed that either staff or the administration would remove the item from the consent agenda and place it on the regular agenda once court formally voted against it. I did not realize that it was necessary for me to individually or for anyone on that matter to contact a board member
and advocate for that action. One of the vote against the item should have been sufficient to elevate the matter for board action without requiring individual committee members to advocate separately for that action. Court's vote had already made clear a recommendation that the board discuss
the item. I was not there over the board approving the contract. That is their prerogative. I was disappointed that they did not even consider court's vote. Again, I want to thank everyone on court for their support and good wishes. I wish you all the best and hope you continue the important work of the committee.
Thank you. I need that again. >> Um >> [clears throat] >> I have nothing else for chairman's report. >> Needs to be muted. >> Uh anyone with a conflict of interest for anything we're reviewing today or has been approached by a lobbyist?
All right. >> Mr. Sanchez is on. >> Okay. Does he want to speak? >> No, I'm just acknowledging the chairman. >> Okay. >> I'm going to speak. No. >> All right. Thank you for joining us. All right. Any issues with the agenda? Any changes or additions to the agenda by court
members? Okay, public comments. Any public comments? Seeing none. Let's get down to our consent agenda. FC1 >> I wanted to pull that. >> FC2
FC3 FC4 FC5 FC6 FC7 >> I wanted that pulled. >> FC8 DC1 DC2 >> I wanted that pulled.
>> DC3 >> I also want that pulled. >> All right. I don't see Virginia on, so we need someone to make a motion to accept the ones that were not pulled. >> I'll make a motion for the consent items that were not pulled. >> Okay, you second? >> Move forward to the board.
>> Seconded by France. Any discussion, questions on that? I'll ask staff to call us, please. >> Ms. Alexander >> Yes. >> David Porter >> Yes. >> Council Michael Wood >> Yes.
>> Tom Odell >> I agree. >> Lisa Reaves >> Yes. >> Michael Guida >> Yes. >> Tom Virginia Ferris >> I don't think Virginia was on for the meeting either.
>> And that's everyone. >> Okay. We were hoping she might have come on. All right, you're checking regularly, right? >> Yes. Once in the top right. >> [clears throat] >> I had pulled FC1, I guess for a longer discussion and questions that I have about
procedure's policy and a lot of the stuff I'm going to ask hasn't changed, but maybe my opinion of it has. Um my understanding is FC1 is either use of contingency, which is allowed under the CM contracts, and
staff is allowed to approve the contingency uses under delegated authority. And it's for change orders that are even extra work as long as they're under delegated authority.
Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. If I'm also understanding it correctly under the current new policies, there is no more aggregate maximum that any particular staff or administration member
uh can approve. It's only a per change order amount. >> Um that is correct. I think there is a cap per project. >> Well, that's what I was asking about. So, there's a tally kept somewhere it's a cap per project? >> Yes. Okay. So, it's not on the individuals per project.
>> like court to see that if you're going to look at FC1, and like I'll use Roosevelt full services as an example where we're getting 100,000 here, 150,000 there every month. Um court can't change any of that. That's
all approved by policy. You're allowed to do that. So, the only thing I see court able to do is we can look at who the delegated authority was to make sure that they haven't exceeded their per item um limit. And then the only other thing we can do
is be the watchdogs to make sure that the aggregate total per project has not been exceeded. Um other than that, there's nothing for us really to look at. I mean, without backup, I can't tell you if $29,283 for the first item or the second item or
whichever it is on came up is correct or not. And and that's okay, it's always been that way for FC-1 items. We haven't been given the backup for that to know what are we critiquing? >> [clears throat] >> I can't honestly tell the board in the
future, and I might vote against FC-1 so that the board knows this, that it's acceptable. Yes, it's a report. But if we're oversight overseeing something where we're just telling the board the board, yeah, we got the report. Well, the board gets a report, too.
So, we're not really overseeing anything with that that is going to be helpful to the board. They can't do anything about it, we can't do anything about it. It's a report, and it's been done under all the approved policies by the board. So, we should just move forward without the
hours of debate that we end up with with critiquing FC-1 like, okay, well, I don't think that should have been that much. How do we know? We don't have the basis to change that. Um There's one of the points I was going to make. Oh,
when we do get a change order that's over, I guess it's what the 200,000 uh yeah, the 200,000 that the superintendent can approve. Um you've told us in the past that that will be coming to us usually in advance of the change order. So, we basically get a slot
that's agreed upon of money for that change order. When that happens, cuz I don't think we've seen one yet, will we be getting back up of something to critique? >> Yes. So, um we don't know how much back up because at that point we're not going
to have a lot of detail. >> Right. >> Um but we will provide a explanation of what we're doing, a cost estimate, um sketch if we have it, whatever information we have will be provided. >> I I don't know if the policy then allows for that actual final change order to
just be I'm going to say a rubber stamp. Because again, if we we can tell the board, yeah, 250,000 sounds about right for the information we've been giving, how little or how much that might be. But then when the actual change order comes through,
um will we be seeing anything that's more detailed for us to oversee? Or is it going to be something that once that gets approved in the prelim stage, we don't see it anymore other than a report? >> It'll be a report, unfortunately.
[clears throat] And the issue is driving that is the 35-day >> Well, I know that. >> Um >> Again, but the board should understand that the intent of the construction oversight and review committee is different at this point and even for
the new board members cuz there's most of them are new from when we've done things before. And we're basically just passing on reports to the board um without there being something for us to actually critique. >> Yeah, and and I
I don't disagree on FC1 items and that's kind of been my position all along that the FC1 items are really just a report. I mean, we have our uh due diligence to make sure the costs are right and it's in the right >> Yeah, I'm not questioning >> And and we we we we actually we learn a
lot from. >> But there's some value with with looking at trends that um of repeat items that we get. Um and I would much rather honestly have Corks been time on on bigger picture issues than debating a $3,000 change. And to me that's that
court provides a lot more value in that standpoint. Looking at our procedures, I don't know what I'm open up myself up here, but really when you read the court policy, look at the procedures, look at how we're doing our capital plan, look at the big picture items that the construction department and the district as a whole, I think there'd be great
value in getting court's input on that. But we're so hyper-focused on on a change order that takes all the time. And maybe it is a a big shift from what the court has done in the past, but in in my view it's more value than debating a a small minor change.
>> I guess it's when I look at the $100,000 plus changes. And I see a lot of them, and it's on one particular project. I mean, to me that's a trend that shouldn't be happening. And that's something happened there along the way that we should have either started from scratch
or it should have had more planning up front instead of it being kind of plan as we go. >> Yeah. >> Um I mean, that's the only feedback I could see us giving to the board and being wary of that if another project like that came to us to say, uh-uh,
no. >> Well, and and that was the perfect example of that is what we're going through on on phase one is it's just a historic historic Roosevelt. Let's be honest, we we all know what we're talking about. On phase two, we've changed our approach on that and we're right now the plan is to demolish the
two existing buildings, only keeping and replicate the facade to make it look like the same to not go go this down this road again. So, there's value that we've come in the lessons learned on that as a as a as a district. Um >> But also recognizing from a historic
perspective that sometimes we do have to or need to or want to try to preserve um the historic or uh older features. Right? Uh did you have something to say?
>> Yeah, and I just wanted to offer a a thought um to address your concerns, you know, because normally the motion is to um recommend to the board approval or something like this. Maybe with the FC items, it would really be the motion should be just to accept the report.
>> I see. >> Um and and you know, to address your concerns cuz and I just wanted to offer that up. >> But accepting the report to me, if I'm a board member and I hear somebody has accepted the report, that means they think it's okay. So, I mean, that's why I was going to
vote no today just to have the voice known to let the board know it's a report. We don't have the data to do any analysis of any costs or the time frames. >> Well, it and it may be, you know, I'm looking at the policy right now and if
you look at and again, I'm looking at the the changed policy, but um it says uh change order clerk is informed of construction change orders affecting the project costs and schedules. These reports shall be entered into the official records of clerk. So, maybe
then the motion is be to accept these the FC one, the vote should be motion to accept these into the official records of clerk. >> And >> consistent with the policy. >> And possibly to say and clerk has not reviewed the cost because it's not our position.
Mr. Alexander. >> Um yeah, I think you and then the final comments that were just stated that was what I was thematically going to suggest that the that as to these FC one items that it not be an issue of acceptance,
but an issue the issue acknowledgement of receipt of the report. You [clears throat] know, as as per the policy, um but without, you know, a further um uh uh description that the report has been
accepted or reviewed or or you know, in detail with backup or anything like that or to suggest that. Um it feels like the underlying policy is for us to have the report given to us and become a part of the record. So, I
don't know if that's already in the policy. I don't know I'm not sure why we would need a motion acknowledging that the policy has been followed. Um and so, I'm asking us to consider sometimes short is is simpler. Just that we have
that we have received the report before the policy. Period. That's just the thought that I have for us to consider. Thank you. >> Nice person. >> Okay. Um That was the reason I didn't hold
>> Mr. Porter. >> Yes. Mr. Porter >> [clears throat] >> You were asking about the person having the um >> the delegated authority. >> delegated authority. >> Yes. >> On the form it shows you what the value of the change is. >> Oh, I know.
>> And then down here then see, it's checked. It's less than 50,000. So, I sign it. >> Are you saying the cumulative for the project isn't shown on this? >> It was not shown. That may be one thing we do track about. >> It's Yeah. >> There's a check mark on We have a checklist that's before this
that has that Is it less than 500,000 for a project under 7.5 million? Is it under a million if it's over 7.5 million? That's what you're not seeing on this form. >> Right now, for that delegated maximum is that for a person or or accumulated
amount of you know, so if you sign one and the superintendent signs one, that's what adds up to the cumulative amount? >> Correct. This is cumulative delegated authority per person. >> By anybody that has delegated the authority. >> Yes. >> So, then I think that's a simple number to add on there.
Um and so, anybody can approve the next item as long as it hasn't gotten over that aggregate amount. >> Yeah, and that's what we track on the log that's that's on every >> Again, we're oversight and we're not given a lot to oversee. I could see them
looking at this, making sure that it was the right person that did did checked it off, and that we haven't gone past the aggregate amount for that project, and move on. Mr. Sanchez. >> Uh >> That was That was I agree with the point
you you just made there. I mean, I as long as the staff in the room is informed, I don't I don't see any particular problem with that. comfort and provides the additional oversight that you that you court piece to have. So, I'm
I'm agreeing with that. The other thing I was I do want to Again, I always say this that because I do value court's input. I think there's some value in getting that report getting this report, and then um in the process that we have where court members can ask questions prior to
this meeting, and then staff responds with more details, I think that process is helpful to us as well. Um you know, so we don't I don't object to you to court members asking those questions and saying, you know, on this item number five or this item number 20, I want to
back up um additional information. I think that's fine. I I don't think you can do it on every single item on this FC list because that then inserts you guys as if you're part of the project management team. You know, um if you have an overall recommendation about how we can improve
our processes, and um you kind of along with Michael Tuosto was saying is is overall how you know, do we need to add another estimator? Do we need to do this? You know, whatever the case may be to to make sure the process is fine is better, I think that that's the kind of advice that we're looking for or recommendations we're looking for.
Um but again, that that process of back and forth with asking those questions we're we're more than happy to accommodate you on um because it helps us and improve our processes here. So that's all my dad. >> If I may ask, um, to to dovetail into Mr. Sanchez, and I'm I'm probably
stepping on Michael's toes on this one, but um, Mr. Sanchez's comments, there's a lot of stuff that staff has learned over the years from our interactions with you guys on any one of these individual ones where as Mr. Sanchez said, if we you ask
the question, "Where's the backup on this? Can you explain this better?" There have been many a time when you ask it to us on a Monday before the meeting and we have been able to go, "Oh gosh, you know what? They're right. What were we thinking?"
What that has led to is an evolvement of evolve evolving of our processes and and um, I know we we'd suggest perhaps maybe we can do for you, walk you through, or even give the whole committee
an overview of the level, the number of steps that we are going through now that are a result of some of our past slips that we've learned from. And I think I've met I mentioned to some of court members in the past
we as as mentioned, we really value your your insights because in fact, it's turned out that our processes end up having people like me not injected in the early stages of reviewing these items, coming back and realizing I'm
looking at them through your lens. And I have found when I look at it from your perspective, I've gained better insight into making sure that we can improve our processes as a whole, not just an individual change order or or CCUA. So I feel like
I I just I want to make sure that it's again reiterated that your your inputs are valued. And just because we've gained a a of insights from this committee over the many years. Doesn't mean that we're done learning.
Like I still don't object terribly to the idea uh to the idea of you guys raising questions on each each of these items and asking as Joe said, you know, on on Monday, "Give me the backup. This doesn't make any sense." And then
hopefully we figure out not only how to fix that one, but how to fix our system and make it a little bit better. Because again, I don't want this It shouldn't be that you guys have to do work every month. We should be doing better each month so that you don't have to do as
much work. That days are common and similar. So, your your recommendation right now was a perfect example. Seeing those every month that we have five items on Historic Roswell, how are we going to make sure that you have a better view of that one and that
your insights into it are are helping us? Um yes, I agree um to a certain extent with Mr. Cheshire's comments about, you know, whether the board sees that. And I think what the board has seen is and what I hope they continue to see is
that staff has gained from this committee. It's not about you guys coming down and saying, "That's wrong. Fix it." No, my goal, I think, for this staff would be, "Let's make it so that we don't have to fix things." And you guys have continued to do that. So, I I
hope that we can continue to have you look at these things and give us these insights that we're missing, not seeing it cuz we're in the weeds sometimes. >> Yeah. >> Um when we get to over the 500,000, I'll use Historic Roswell again cuz it sounds
like we might be near that with all the change orders we've >> Yeah, that that 212 one that actually pushed So, that would have went to the board if it was the lot less than that. >> Okay. >> And if it goes to the board, do we see it or that misses the 35 day >> If it's FC, that case, that's what FC >> Yeah. >> 7
>> Right. >> And and with that, we get more actual backup or that becomes an estimate. >> No packet. Most of the packet. Yeah, there we take out some of the week >> yeah, no, I don't know what those are. Hundreds of pages long. >> Yeah, I understand that. Again, >> It's a notebook worth.
>> And the Roosevelt, correct me if I'm wrong, that's under the old rules. >> It is. >> Right. >> Right. So, I just as I'm going to get that one. >> It is under the old rules for the 35 >> rules. >> I mean, under the new policy. >> The old statute. >> Right. Old statute, new policy. >> Executed before the old statute. >> So, some of these are kind of in that in
that predicament. They have the new policies that we're required to follow, but the um >> [clears throat] >> So, the the Sorry. Yeah, the policies we're required to follow new policies, but the statute is under the old statute. So, we're kind of in limbo with some of those projects.
>> All right. Okay, so when that happens and we go over that number, if something has to go to board, then we see more than usually just an estimate. >> Yes. >> We will get the estimated change order when you know it's something off in the distance. So, that we get a chance to at least [clears throat] look at the root of
entry facts of why the change is needed and what the estimated cost will be with minimal backup. I mean, there's got to be some backup in >> So, there's backup >> You got to grab a number up here. That's your number. Okay. >> And I think that's one of the uh for us um development with contractors and
architects, I know you guys sitting in the room wondering how that going to affect you. I think it's going to basically tell them, "Guys, those long those big con- those big change orders, you better really do a lot more than just a hey, uh little note, yeah, we're going to be
coming in with a big one." No, you better have everything. You better have a much better view. What's the scope? What's [clears throat] the What are the legitimate costs? And how are we going to implement it? Because that's one of the biggest challenges, right? Is we say, "Yeah, but
that's not that's not you can't implement that in a reasonable amount of time. We need to make sure that all of that stuff is being considered when we get that first draft. It can't be as you said just some number out of the air. So I think we're put we're going to put a lot more pressure on the contractors
and architects to make sure that that review that uh recommended for delegation is um much more detail. Okay. Mike waited you have something? No. Um Mike forgot what I was going to say but I agree with you.
I I don't I agree with Mr. Porter that I don't spend as much time on FC1 uh document as I do the others uh just because I know our say is not that the input's not really there so
it's it's just approving a report or accepting the report. That's all I want to say. Okay, I had pulled FC1. Um any other discussion? Someone want to make a motion to let it go forward as
accepted but not necessarily reviewed. Yeah, what's the language you'll use? >> And as following up if you'd like to Mr. Porter might I suggest um that your motion be to for court to acknowledge receipt of the FC1 report
pursuant to policy and then if you want to add >> without not reviewed or >> without validation or some >> phrase >> All right, so if someone wants to make a motion cuz I don't think the chair is allowed to. We can acknowledge receipt of the FC1 report
with notation that we have not reviewed it. Um >> Who is it? >> Yeah, again I would and I don't know who just spoke the words >> I did. >> before you. No, no, no, right before you. >> Oh, Holly did.
>> Where it says that it where Holly said it's been received pursuant to court um pursuant to court policy. That That's the part that I would ask be included. Um uh because that sort of gives us the umbrella because the policy defines what
our role is in in relation to this item. So, if we've received it received it pursuant to court policy, I think we're covered. Um and I would ask for for consideration that we include that within within the Thank you.
>> That sounded like a motion. Want to make a motion, Mr. Attorney? >> [clears throat] >> Yes. Yes, I so move. Thank you. >> Any a second on that? >> Second. [clears throat] >> Second by France. Any other discussion, questions, comments? I'd staff poll us, please.
>> Bruce Alexander. >> Yes. [clears throat] >> Evan Porter. >> Yes. >> France Amakou. >> Yes. >> Lisa Reyes. >> Yes. >> Michael Guida. >> Yes. >> That's everyone.
>> We're one more. >> Do we? >> That's everyone. >> Virginia Farrior. >> You know there's six of us. >> I think so. >> Sorry, Jim. >> Director Jim All guests. >> It's I'd say there's six.
>> Um see we're up to FC7. I got to get my information handy. I remember what I wrote about. Um I guess it was just the time frame for why it took so long to get a CO for work
that took place kind of the first couple of weeks of construction. And the PCO was issued uh almost a year ago. >> Yeah, there was a lot of back and forth um with the comments. This is This is derived from city of West Palm comments and there's usually very little um
comments that we receive from the city that really talk about the just the connection of the utilities and the infrastructure and the drives. Um but in this case there was a lot of back and forth with revised comments and plans and checking we had to do is we had to do some um chamfering up some lines and a lot of
the stuff like that that you've seen earlier change orders in the process that we approved in order to just determine what needed to be done on the project. And then we had to do the design plans, get those all approved, and then get the change orders, and then we went back and forth um making sure the change orders were correct. It was
just um in an effort to make sure this is correct in the end. It took that long. They did proceed forward with the work. So, this wasn't um you know, the They went forward and got the work done, so it didn't hold things up, but it just took a while. Okay. >> David, can you check and see if Virginia
texted me saying she's been trying to get in? >> Just checked and I didn't >> Uh or resend her the link. If you can just see if you can email her the link again. >> I can add a comment. The >> C7
>> Uh yeah, I see C7. Um it says there's a zero non-compensable calendar days. So, does that mean that the contractor is not adding any days to the contract? >> Because of this item, correct. >> Because of this item. >> Yeah. >> So, they're able to squeeze $200,000
worth of work without adding one calendar day to the contract. >> It's not possible. >> Yeah, because others. cuz they went forward with the the pad work, so it's being done as the building. So, the build it wasn't part of the critical path, the site work. >> It can be put done in parallel. >> Yeah. >> To to that work.
>> Correct. >> Do you guys look at things like that? >> We provide a very detailed schedule. Um when they do a when anytime there's a cost or a day request, we do a comparative analysis where we look at what was revised in the critical path. Um so,
that we provide two different narrative narratives and schedules. There's a There's a big review with that, yeah. >> Well, I know getting a project done at at a certain time is critical for the school board, you know, at the end of the summer or by a certain uh holiday where they have open
um non-days of um school. >> This one there was delays. This particular I didn't have delays, but you notice on some of the other changes there were delays that have come in through with this project. As you as you see with, you know, two of the buildings are just about done and the third is uh far behind because of the unforeseen
>> So, going back to the FC1, is there any calendar days added to that form or >> So, >> how do we know that there's time going to be added for those >> Wasn't that was on Isn't that on the summary, Judge? >> Each of the forms, if you look at the
bottom, it tells you the number of days that they're adding. I didn't see any days that were checked off on anything that was in FC1. >> Yeah, I see it on the bottom. Yeah. >> I had a question. What did the D mean? >> Yeah, there's a delegated authority limit. >> mean days. Is that Oh, all right.
>> Not unlike [clears throat] dollar value, there's a there's a uh delegated authority day extension as well. So, um for the general manager, they can approve up to $50,000 and up to 50 days. Um for myself, I can approve up to $100,000 and 100 days per instance.
>> So, is there an aggregate total per project for number of days that can be approved? No, just dollars. >> I don't I there is. >> Yeah, I wouldn't worry about days. It's going to be money that the board needs to know about, not if it's going to take longer. >> As you mentioned, we are concerned about the days. Days are Some cases days are
not a big deal. Some days >> It's everything. >> are is everything. Opening a school on time is right, but sometimes we're adding days or during the closeout process in which we've already opened the school and there's documentation and approvals from
water utilities and things like that that are holding up the days. Those are days that don't cost us much to us. >> There's a cost to not adding days to the contract to the change order. There's a cost to that cuz you got to throw more bodies at the work to get it done within
that time frame. So, time frame. So, we're probably paying for overtime and and premium time. >> Again, the same premise. It depends on the type of day we're talking about. The type of day at the beginning of the project, it's it is very much staff.
That's why those zero compliance days are are really important. The ones at the end when we're adding 300 days, that's there's no staff. There's really no staff charging for that kind of activity because it's Well, we're just waiting for some agency to approve something. So,
there's not really a dollar value to those. >> I think out of 24 years I've been on corp, I think we only had one school that for liquidated damages or something, I can't remember, was delayed by maybe a month. And so, kids had to
remain in the holding school they were in until they could move over to the new school. And then we had COVID. >> Is it >> Is he looking at >> Why are you looking at us? >> I told you. >> over there and I kind of >> I got you. >> squirming in their chairs.
>> It was before their time. >> It was before [laughter] their time. >> Okay. Anything Any else on FC7? Need a motion to go forward. >> Who's to go forward? >> I. >> I'll second it. >> Seconded by Mike Gwita. Is there any other discussion? discussion?
Right staff call us please. >> Bruce Alexander >> Yes. >> Evan Porter >> Yes. >> Hans Mykaboo, I'm old. Lisa Reves >> Yes. >> Michael Guida >> Yes.
>> And is Virginia Ferris on? >> No. >> Not yet? >> I sent her all the information. >> Okay. >> Okay. Down to PC 2. For example, PC 2 is listed I think for purchasing.
Why are we seeing such great interest in roofers? In the last I think four roofing bids we've had like over a dozen bidders. >> Yes. >> 15 on this one, yeah. >> We love it. >> Right, so that >> Everybody's doing roofs out there and they're desperate. I mean, what's the deal?
>> We've been promoting in all of our outreach events that we have, you know, millions and millions of dollars of roofing projects coming up. So, um and we've had an outreach, you know, through our pre-qualification process trying to bring more roofers in, so >> It's [clears throat] working.
>> And and in addition, I don't want to say that from that from that on the design side, the simple fact that we actually have really good designers putting together really good designs on our roofs, we're getting competitive bids and we're knock on wood that they Now, let's give me the kiss of death, but we're not getting change
orders on those. So, they're they're very good well-developed plans. There's there's, you know, that the pre-investigation to make sure that we know where the damage truly is. So, they're getting a good set of plans, but good bid package makes it nice and easy to have
competitive solid pricing, so >> That's why that the top numbers are >> I looked at the numbers, they were tight. >> They were they were tight. >> It's an indication of good documents. >> And that usually is the result of good drawings that they can feel confident in instead of thinking what do I have to add to this set of drawings. Make sure I
don't lose my company. >> And for me to actually make a compliment to architects in general is something right there. >> [laughter] >> Right write this down. >> I'll take a picture and hear response from Jim Holt on the last vote.
FC7, Jim are you there? I guess you have to mark him absent for that vote. >> We don't have a we don't have a quorum if we didn't do that. >> This was this is No I'm Sorry, I had to step out one second. >> Just wanted to give you a chance to vote on FC7.
>> All right, so we'll wait until he can vote on that. He's probably on a phone call. >> Can you hear me now? >> Yes, we can hear you. >> Did Did you want to vote for or against FC7? >> For. For. >> Okay. >> Got it. That completes that.
>> Next. >> All right, um I had pulled PC2 for that question about roofers and that got answered, so you know, motion to move forward PC2. >> Who wants to go forward with PC2? >> Okay, Frank. Give me a second. >> Second.
>> Second. >> And Mike Guida. Any other discussion? All right, staff poll us, please. >> Bruce Alexander. >> Yes. >> David Porter. >> Yes. >> Once Malibou. >> Yes. >> Jim Alt. >> Yes. >> Lisa Reves. >> Yes.
>> Michael Guida. >> Yes. >> And that's everyone. >> Okay, PC3. I also pulled that. I think my question was answered in the responses that it the job is about 1.4 million over the
construction estimate and that that will be coming from the sales tax contingency that ISOC will be seeing. So, I didn't have any more [clears throat] comments or questions on that. Anyone else with questions on PC
3? All right, seeing none. Need a motion to move forward with PC 3. Any motion? Somebody online? PC 3? >> Vote to go forward with PC 3. >> Frank. >> I'll second it. >> Uh, second by Jim Alt. Okay. Any other
discussion question? All right, staff. Please. >> Bruce Alexander. >> Yes. >> David Porter. >> Yes. >> Frank Macklemore. >> Yes. >> Jim Alt. >> Yes. >> Lisa Reaves. >> Yes. >> Mike Guido.
>> Yes. >> That's everyone. >> Okay. Takes care of down to discussion of anything new by staff. Staff discussion, I guess we don't need that. [clears throat] 4.0.
Oh, yeah. Uh, that's different. Staff updates and in progress. >> I don't know why that's its own item. >> Yeah, I don't know why it's its own its own item. So, we're down to staff updates. Okay. >> Well, um
on a personal note of privilege, I I want to thank everybody for allowing me to skip last month's um court meeting. >> We didn't allow it. >> I was sick. How did I get How did I get excused? >> You did I can't excuse that. >> Mr. Sansone, you'll have to take take me up on that one. But, um I had the uh the
joy of um watching my eldest child graduate from University of Florida. >> Oh, that's nice. >> And um um for for better or for worse, um I'm excited because she's coming to work for the School District of Palm Beach County. >> Oh my god. >> [clears throat] >> Yes.
>> Um go Gators. >> Yeah, go Gators. And uh >> And she's not one of the first layoffs. >> Yes. >> Wow. >> All All circle the drain now, guys. >> [laughter] >> Well, but I also had the the pleasure of having two more graduations shortly
thereafter. I had a graduation from Jupiter High School and a graduation from middle school. >> I got your email. >> And technically a fifth grader going to sixth. >> And I got I got called out by my one remaining child who is graduating from fifth grade and didn't actually have a graduation and she was really mad that
she was not getting her own special celebration. So, I am I am owing her a lot now. >> It's major. Absolutely. >> But no, I I thank you guys for for um affording me that opportunity. Quite honestly, graduation time every time
every time this time of year uh helps me uh remind be reminded of what we do and why we do it. And um you know, we we focus so much on the on the nuts and bolts of getting work done and making sure schools are operating fully and
whatnot. And and I guess once in a while each of us probably needs that >> check-in to realize that we're doing it for the kids and you know, for the teachers as well, right? That are um serving these kids. And um and that it's really refreshing uh to see what
the futures are going to are going to hold for a lot of these uh a lot of these kids. So, uh great time of year. Um um I'll I'm going to turn over to Michael cuz I think you're probably going to mention the fact that next month uh here. >> No. >> Yeah, I'm obviously it's a busy time of
year. We're kicking off a lot of summer work projects as schools leave, but um you know, most of our schools just to know what our contractors go through, they all have almost everyone has camps and different events there and still people that we don't ever shut them down. So, we try to you know, we make sure we provide a safe working
environment, but at the same time we're making sure we get a lot of work done over the summers to not impact the school days as much when we get there. So, um we have a lot of work lined up for that. Um yes, next month um we'll be moving over to Lincoln Elementary hopefully on June 10th. So, we do expect
that next month's court meeting will be at at be at the media center there. >> Actually, in 2 months. >> It's actually 2 months, in July 9th. >> July 9th, of course. >> And that is the next court meeting, right? Cuz there's a summer break there. >> Um I also have a a couple announcements. So, um I've I'm remiss because I um
Jasmine has been helping us for a few months and I haven't introduced her. I remember going to introduce her to one meeting with that was the one we ran really long, but she's been on board with the the the construction department for about 5 or 6 months now and she's a jack-of-all-trades to help us across the board, just keep us running. It's only 5
or 6 months? It feels like it's like 3 years. >> [laughter] >> Wow, that's an incredible job. >> Um in addition to that, so as you know, we've been working with one general manager. Um Dorothy's doing closeouts, but David's been our general manager, but Jud and um James were in the back here, you've seen them, they're S- they
were SBAs. Um next month, we expect they'll be hopefully approved by the board to become our next general managers. Um so, you will be seeing them sign a lot of the documents that right now David is doing all the signing. >> What's happening with David? >> He's not going anywhere. >> Yeah, he's not going You're going to be a general manager also. >> I'll still be here.
>> So, we've >> We've locked this work >> with three general managers. >> Yeah. >> Okay. And there's there is um >> Evelyn E. >> backfill. >> Yeah. >> backfill >> So. >> So, the general manager's position, that does both the full-size jobs as well as
the small projects. >> Correct. They each have about a dozen or so um uh project [clears throat] managers of different types that they directly manage all their projects. So, the way we're structured is that they're reviewing um those projects from a scope, budget,
change order standpoint. So, they have a really good knowledge of a second set of eyes on every project. Cuz as you guys know, if you've ever managed a project, you get kind of tunnel vision and into the weeds on it and just another set of eyes is really helpful when just looking at things. So, we want to make sure we
have some good coverage. So, one that we can have proper oversight, we do a good job, we're thorough, um >> And more timely. >> More timely, yeah. >> So, that's that's been some of our complaints from our contractors and architects, um and now a lot of the systems we have in place are
intended to speed through, make sure we get good set eyes, and get it done quickly. >> Do their positions need to then be replaced under the SPAs? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And we have actually hired two SPAs that went through yesterday to the board meeting, so they'll be starting soon, so. >> Yeah, one of them we're excited because
he's actually working on on the World Cup. So, he's he's not starting right away cuz he's >> [clears throat] >> a little bit busy for the next couple of months, but he is going to be a great addition to our our team. >> So, it would seem like you're not
finding a lack of bodies out there that are qualified. >> We are. >> Oh, you are. >> We are, yeah. We have a hard time, um we have um several more open positions that we're advertising for, um we're able to fill in a few here and there, but we're definitely um you know, the
the construction department, we're fortunate in this sense that we're funded by capital money, so we have nothing to do with operating budget. So, um we need people to get the work done, so we are the one of the few departments that are hiring people in the district. Um now, when eventually if that capital money went away, we we're at a
completely different pace than the teachers, so they're they're independent. So, right now, we we have a lot of um money coming in because of the the voters approved the penny sales tax extension for another 10 years, so we need to keep keep working. And we're as you know, we're transitioning away from
AECOM to a staff-out model where we're doing more of the work in-house, and so we're ramping that up to prepare for that as well, and to have as many our goal is to have as many in-staff staff as we can, um because of the cost standpoint, obviously.
>> And is George Perez our new architect replacement? Did they replace the lady that passed away. I can't remember her name. >> Yes, Sherry Kelly. >> Right, Sherry. >> Yes. >> So, George replaced that position. >> The nature is available. >> [laughter] >> Ouch.
>> That's right. >> Okay. >> today. >> Continue. That was it? You guys are done? >> I had. >> All right. And um this month's cork meeting construction updates. Um we're
not really going to go through. I'm not going to You're welcome to Anybody is welcome to scroll down and see the big pictures. Yeah, for example, if we go down to West Rib if you want. It's way, way down. Page like slide number 38 or something like that. All that's the ongoing stuff. Yes, yes. And but we get into our major
construction. There you go. You'll notice that that is West Rib. And Donnell looks like it's pretty well just about done. And in fact, it is. So, we are um >> We're going through final inspections right now. So, >> Yeah, yeah. >> Well, you can notice that there's some
of the notations where a lot of our finals have been accepted. >> That finished up about when you thought it was cuz when we started the project, you said it'd probably somewhere between like, you know, May and June to be finished, but you weren't going to move in until August. >> Right. And we're we're [clears throat]
hoping to start moving in in in June. >> At the end of June. >> Yeah, you know. Um but yeah, it looks like the the beginning of July furniture >> James, right? We've got furnitures. >> On on So, um >> Before you go too much further, way back up top, you had the sales tax money.
>> Mhm. >> Um are you going to be showing the double sales tax? >> Uh next I say next month. >> Leanne and I um >> This is completely my fault. So, Leanne, if you're if you do end up hearing this cuz I don't think she's on it right now, but if you hear this, it's completely my
fault. We are expecting to try to get together and rework how we're going to present the marriage of the two sales tax uh not sets of numbers together. Uh so and you know, this this month I have been quite
busy myself and I am uh so um this is fine. Hopefully this will be the last one that in July you will see a um amalgamated version uh that talks about the sales tax for both together. >> Is the 1.5 then the total amount that we have received under the what I'll call
the former tax? >> Uh well, that's the problem is the top two numbers are actually the February numbers because I think this is what Leanne always says, well that's that there's a couple of months March delay from the >> Okay. [clears throat] >> um presentation. >> not the total. >> So it's not the current total, but it's
Yeah, or it's tracking. >> But there will be a limit to it because I think there was one more month. I think it was March reporting. >> That's why I was going to say. I didn't That's why I don't want to get in trouble because I'm going to say the wrong thing. >> It's just not the number. Yeah, we got more money to add to that. >> Right. Go ahead. Sorry.
Go on. >> Um >> Down to West Rib. >> Yeah, we so we have West Rib that is is uh nearing completion as well uh Roosevelt one right after uh West Rib. Um you can see from those photos um Roosevelt is pretty far along on the
two buildings. The the gymnasium of course, that's the the latest building change order. So we're working on that, but um I I want to say that um in the next couple um coming months we're going to be opening up or have available to
open up the two buildings, the actual educational buildings. >> So they will open for classes in August? >> I want I don't know if August because adult education works on a different time schedule. I don't know exactly when those classes would begin, but yes, the
expectation is in short order they will be opening. I will get you back those. And then um usually this is where I I make fun of Dorothy and say she's not really doing anything. Well, she's not. Now it's it's David and and Jud and and James. So,
they do have um a lot of uh minor projects that are um ongoing. And um as Michael mentioned, we're getting a lot of projects that are geared up for summer work. So. It's fun. And yes, to your point earlier, here's some roof projects. We do have some roof
work going on. That is for certain. >> You get the most roofing projects during the wettest part of the year. >> Yeah, right. >> Um Yeah, it's I'm trying to I'm trying to get hurricane windows. Um well, for the personally, like >> Who decides to go get hurricane windows in May?
>> Well, you do if you want them by November. >> Yeah, in November for next year, exactly. So. Um and that's and this is our last slide. That's uh a press box. >> That renovation at at Wellington High School. >> But it's just symbolic of a lot a lot of work that's going on.
>> All right. Did it? That's it for us. >> All right. Any questions on that? Okay. Follow up. Um it looks like most of what we talk about on the follow up can probably be removed >> The tree will be removed next month. We
just acknowledge that it happened last meeting. Then they drop off. >> Still active. Then would be the number two. >> Okay, that's >> It's ongoing. >> Lori, do you have any update on that? >> Yeah, Kristen provided me an update
yesterday. Um let me just pull it up here. And I can read it. Um Let's see. All right. So, Kristen says um the current status is that we are still
waiting to hear back from the county regarding the proposed revision. So, it says the last update we got was that the county attorney had provided his comments to the water utilities district for review and comment. I emailed him to follow up on May 15th and again yesterday to see what the status was and
have not heard back yet. >> So, we're still in the same from the old same same status. So, [clears throat] we'll stay on top of it. >> This will be an example of the delay closing out a project because you without the easement you can't get sign off from the county's water utilities.
>> Water utilities has never been our friend with scheduling. >> That's a fair statement. >> [clears throat] >> Okay, anything else on follow up anyone? All right, approval of minutes. Anyone with issues on the minutes? >> Oh, yes. I have a small issue. The
meeting started around 1:00 p.m. but it says that it was adjourned at 11:31. >> That's pretty good. >> That was fast. Fast meeting we had. >> I guess David you don't need to >> That's a very good catch. I didn't see that. >> Did you uh
>> Yes, I had trouble with the link and I want to know who on earth to contact. I've been trying to get in since 5:00 to 9:00. >> Well, I got your text and I immediately then notified David here in the room and he resent you the link.
>> He just sent it now. >> Well, he sent it a while ago. It it >> Well, I don't know. Maybe he has a wrong and wrong email or something. >> Well, I I have two emails for you and those are the same ones we use every month. >> Yes, I I've looked everywhere. I'm I'm so frustrated. [laughter]
Anyway, um >> this thing >> Please please note that that I've been in spirit with you since uh 9:00. >> Mr. And and anybody else on court? Um um as as was mentioned earlier, we have
Jasmine. Jasmine's in the room and we also have Aaron, um, my admin. Um, they are very much always in in um, at your disposal. Um, I know Aaron is actually on vacation today but she's actually this meeting today because
she's was fearful of that kind of thing. So, um, we'll make sure I reach out with phone numbers. >> Yes, I tried calling Aaron on both her phone numbers. >> Oh, okay. Um, So, >> She's in a my tie on the beach somewhere.
>> That's what I was going to say. So, somebody send >> And she deserves it. >> Send me a good link. A good phone number. >> Okay. >> Maybe maybe I need David. I don't know. I tried you early on, uh, David Porter.
And um, >> I got your text right to actually my watch and I immediately notified David Brooks. >> I think the building is built so well that it takes a little while sometimes for things to be sent out. >> It's because you have potholes in the parking lot. >> [laughter]
>> Well, anyway, um, um, the minutes were good and I and I think you got a good catch there. I didn't catch that correction. >> All right. >> Meaning the minutes are then accepted as edited. >> Oh, by the way, I can personal
privilege, um, I wanted to congratulate uh, France has uh, been selected to be uh, part of Palm Beach County Leadership. Yeah, I saw that. Good job. >> It's an incredible program and you're going to it's going to be awesome. So so
proud to have you in there. >> Yeah, I did that. I did that in 1994. It was great. >> It's yesterday. >> Yesterday, yes. >> All right, uh, anything specific we want staff to bring back for the next
meeting. I don't think we've mentioned anything that needs to come back. If it public so, no. Okay. Anything by court members, anything else? All right, we are then adjourned. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Part: 2
Right. Hi, Mr. Major and Miss Branch. Uh, we are waiting for a quorum. Um, I did have a member last night had a last minute meeting come up at 9:00 a.m. this morning that they're unable to change. Uh, so I just need to make sure that we
will continue to have a quorum. Um, so we do have to wait u for a couple minutes because right now we only have one and we will need four. So we did receive confirmation that we'd have a quorum. Uh, so we'll just wait a couple minutes before we start.
I see that Miss Sizzle also joined. Um, so we have two two members. Uh, we're going to follow up with those that had confirmed u to join. There is really bad weather that's caused bad traffic. Um, so that may delay uh may have delayed those members. So, we're going to call
follow up u and we'll get back to you shortly. Thank you. We just heard back from two members that they will be joining shortly. Mr. Fe just joined. Um so we'll need one more member for a quorum. Um and I know
that he'll be joining um but had a a last minute um uh appointment that he needed to cover. So we'll join immediately after that. We also have another member who will be joining around 9:30. Uh to respect the committee's time, what I'll do is I'll
get started with anformational meeting. Um and so I'll get started with the the presentation. Um and then I will offer to those committee members that join late um that they can u uh work with me directly and I can walk through
the presentation in detail with them um on a one-on-one basis. Um I will also um have to schedule uh we'll have to schedule future meeting so that we can work on the report to the board. I wanted to get some feedback from the committee members uh today um on what to
include within that report but wanted to set up a virtual meeting on either June 2nd or 5th um getting some again input from the committee on which date uh will work better for them for you all. All right,
I will start with the presentation. We're going to walk through again just our new enrollment reality and where we are. Uh we've lost 10,000 students. That's the largest uh reduction in um enrollment that we've had um
historically um in Palm Beach County. go through an overview of what really makes up uh the general fund. Um and then what we had to do in order to try to balance the general fund operating budget after extending a 3% recurring
increase um to um to all groups um and the the cuts that we're making within departments and schools and how we allocated that additional reduction u between the department sites as well as the schools. uh walk through the FY27
legislative update. Uh so the special session is in the cooling off period. Uh both the House and the Senate agreed on their proposal on Tuesday uh of this week uh on the 26. We received a detail of what that budget uh looks like. Um
and I'll walk through that uh and we'll give an update of uh to the capital budget uh which follows the initial review of the capital budget uh that we brought to the committee back in January. So changes from that presentation in January.
you just a a reminder um to the committee, you know, how this decline in enrollment is truly unprecedented. When you uh we had a drop of enrollment of 6,000 students um during the pandemic era, we were able to stabilize and start
to increase our enrollment um up to through 2025. And then we had an an unexpected drop between 25 and 26, over 7,000 students. And we have a projected additional decline of another approximately three 3,000 students in
the FY27 year. So a loss of 10,000 students over a two-year period represents nearly $und00 million in loss revenue. When you look at the general fund and what the general fund funds, 80% of our
spend is on salary and benefits. And when you look at the salary and benefits, schools make up 90% of that 80% that we're spending on salary and benefits. Transportation staff makes up 5% and all other departments make up the
other 5%. When you look at our ad administration, we are very lean. So, based on the most recent report uh that was released by the Florida Department of Ed for the FY25 year comparing Palm Beach to our
peer districts and our peer districts are Hillsboro, Orange, Broward, Miami Dade, and Duval, those are all the districts that have enrollment of over a 100,000 students. uh when you look at u full-time equivalent staff um over
across all funding sources and you look at the percentage of administrators and managers, our percent within Palm Beach County is 3.5% of the total uh full-time equivalent employees. Uh when you
compare us to our our closest peer, Hillsboro, Hillsboro is at 3.8% 8% um and it goes all the way up to 6% um in Duval County schools. Uh Hillsboro is one of the districts that had a a pretty significant structural imbalance
within their budget. Um and they had significant cuts and reduction within their staffing in order to align their budget. Um, you know, so for for Palm Beach to be less than Hillsboro, I mean, it shows we are are truly a a lean
district in terms of administration. When we went through this second round of uh reductions of the committee uh we already walked through the first round of reductions and the reason for that first round of reductions is because in
FY26 we had that unexpected loss of uh 7,000 students. uh we lost $66 million in revenue and based on the changes that we were able to make based on aligning um staffing on enrollment using our
current allocation formulas, we only saved $20 million. So we were looking at a $40 million shortfall in order to just balance the FY26 budget going into FY27. We knew we were going to be spending
down fund balance, but we wanted to make sure that we were spending down fund balance in only one year and that we were we would then be structurally balanced in FY27. So, we worked with both schools and departments uh to balance a a $40
million shortfall. Uh we worked that through the school budgets that were released in February. And then we've been working uh with the departments and and finalized the first round of reductions in the March by that March time frame. Uh the financial objective
for each department was allocated uh to each division chief. Each chief then strategically looked within their division, within each of the departments as where we could really truly create efficiencies, strategic realignments,
consolidation to reduce duplicate duplication of effort, where we could renegotiate contracts, whatever savings we could make. Um so then u the board um has agreed to a a
3.5% uh recurring raise u to all employee groups which now is going to increase uh that uh shortfall um to by an additional $28 million. Uh so again, we had to go back um
because it's important um important to the board to ensure that we're fiscally responsible and to realign the budget um to ensure that it's going to be structurally balanced going into FY27. Uh so in so now we had went through
their first round of reductions. So, we're now going through our second round of reductions in order to balance that FY uh the the shortfall in FY26 going into FY27. Of that $28 million, uh departments are
taking on a larger proportional share of that reduction because if you go back and we look at the staffing, 90% of the staffing is at school sites compared to 10% um within departments, including 5% of that in transportation. Um so instead
of a 9010 breakout um departments are taking on a 22% share and schools 78%. So the the financial objective for schools was $21.8 million and the financial objective for departments was 6.2
with the schools. We worked with a group of principles to ensure to get their their feedback um to understand what oh and uh Mr. Parks just joined. So we now officially have a quorum. So uh thank you Mr. Parks for joining. And so as we
um worked through those school level um changes, we always incorporate um feedback from a group of principles um to understand, you know, what the true impact is that's going to be that's going to occur on the school site to try
to as much as possible um minimize uh the impact. in looking at the breakout and we'll go through the actual reductions in in much more detail um at the department level. Uh but if you look at the round one and
round two reductions combined, there's a total of 583 positions uh that were eliminated at school sites, but that's on nearly 17,000 total positions. So that 583 represents 3.4% 4% of the
school-based positions. There were 20 uh positions within transportation uh that were eliminated out of a thousand positions. So that represents 1.9% of the total positions in transportation. And then in all other it was 47
department positions out of a total of 877 representing 5.3% uh reduction of positions within the department bucket. Um so showing that departments took on more um of the
reduction um than schools or um uh transportation. When you look as a reduction of the percentage of budget um the total dollar amount uh the round one and round two reductions was within schools totaled 50.9 million but the
total school budget is 1.46 billion. So that represents a reduction of 3.5%. Um and if you remember the first round of reductions um at schools was 2%. Uh so schools took on an additional 1.5%
and within departments looking at round one and round two. It's a total of 17.8 million out of a total department budget of 220 million. So that represents a reduction within departments of 8.1%. And so ultimately looking at our
financial objective and where we ended up um departments had an original financial objective of six million. Um schools had the original uh financial objective of 20 21 million. Schools ended up a little bit less. Um and
departments took on uh a little bit more of the burden. Um so taking on instead of an increase from the 6 million to 8.3 million. Uh so the actual allocation of that $28 million uh reduction 71% of
that was at reductions at school sites with 29% of the reduction being absorbed by the departments. So a much larger proportional share um than that 10% of departments and looking at the breakout of the more
detailed reductions. Um this chart shows um the combination of the round one and round two reductions. The the blue part of the bar represents round one reductions that departments made. The gray part of the bar represents round
two reductions that were made. Um and so like I said the financial objective uh was allocated to each division chief. Each division chief then had the responsibility to strategically um uh align uh and make reductions within
their division. There was not a target that was provided for each department. Uh so we looked at you know starting with operational efficiencies. Uh transportation is the largest department uh within departments. Over 30% of the
department budget um is absorbed by transportation and you can see that by just the the number of of personnel. We're one of the largest transportation providers in in the county. Um and so that shift for transportation is really
shifting from contracted service providers uh to utilizing um uh district drivers and um and just shifting from that contracted to back to yellow bus uh providers or or district staff. Uh there
will be a reduction in um tree trimming. uh for example, we're looking at, you know, where do we what are we doing that's over and above? So, tree trimming will be limited to uh just that that's
required for safety uh uh reasons. We're reducing uh advertising dollars that we had set aside for staff recruitment and but we're not eliminating the what we're the amount we're spending for marketing purposes.
We're going to repurpose that to the last bar on the chart, which is our enrollment growth initiative. So, you'll see that's actually an increase of $800,000 because our revenue is driven by enrollment. Um, and so, uh, we no longer
have the need that we had in order to advertise to recruit staff. Uh, but we do have a need, uh, to recruit and retain um, students because that's where we actually earn and generate our revenue. Uh so we are going to be adding
three positions um as well as adding additional funds for schools for marketing initiatives. This enrollment growth initiative is going to be centralized within one department um so that we can have one um centralized a cohesive marketing effort
um from our school district to bring back and and attract uh enrollment. uh we looked at all of our contracts and and all of our software to look to see, you know, what changes and and reductions have been made uh within the
contracts. Um so we are still continuing Khan Academy, but there have been efficiencies uh within that uh contract and um uh Khan Academy has worked with the district uh to reduce uh the the actual cost of of those licenses. So
we're continuing that the same level of service but at a reduced cost. Um personnel consolidation that is the biggest shift from the first round of reductions to the second round of reductions. Uh we've had we've worked
internally uh within each of the divisions u to reorganize um and to also consolidate duties. So the first round of reduction was a total reduction of 16 positions. In the second round of
reductions, it's 66 positions uh that have been um eliminated. Uh there and not included within that total is also um u reorganization um downgrading positions, reorganizing
um staff um to shift job duties uh to like I said to reduce duplication of effort and and to be more efficient. We also looked for alternative funding shifts. Um so that's about split half and half between the first round and the
second round. uh looking at opportunities where there are are things like uh PSC tests that have been taken on at the state level. So we had the ability to reduce our budget internally uh to looking at also whether there were
additional uh positions or additional funding that we could shift to other restricted sources uh within the district budget. Um we also looked at any programmatic adjustments. So for example, summer reading, summer reading
is required based on performance. In looking at uh the performance level of our students, uh the amount of intervention needed over that summing summer period has reduced because our stu students have been performing performing better. So we've been a we
were able to reduce that summer reading budget by $500,000. Uh foundations and youly uh that's a program that we implemented last year. Um but since we implemented it um in the previous year, we do not need the same
level of effort in the current year. And so that's why we are able to look and reduce um the the budget set aside uh for that program. And then the remaining is just miscellaneous reductions that include um
travel um supplies just miscellaneous other lines within department budgets that were reduced. So the total uh department reductions over round one and round two totaled $17.8 million and that includes the increase for that
enrollment growth initiative. This is the breakdown of those reductions by division. And so that's $17.8 million. Um and you can see that uh the uh percentage reduction um is by
division. Um and that's to show that each division uh um more than exceeded what the requirement was at the school site level. Um because we wanted to show the school sites that we were taking on and the departments were taking on a
larger portion of um uh of the burden of the uh $28 million reduction in that that second round of reduction. I wanted to highlight communications because it shows they have an increase. they have that increase because communications is the division that's going to be taking
on that centralized enrollment growth initiative. So if you were to back out the additions were making for that new initiative and the reductions that they made their reductions totaled 7%. So you know offset offsetting those
reductions against the uh what was added that's why it's showing an increase of 11%. But they communications actually they also participated in in the reductions and so their reduction was a 7% reduction. And looking in health and wellness um that shows a reduction of
only 3.2%. Uh but the health and wellness budget of $30 million includes uh the school um psychological services. Um and so those are the school psychologists that are actually work at the school sites. they
were not part of the um reduction that the the department was required to make. So if you remove that portion of the budget which is 12.7 million of the school psych psychological services from the health and wellness budget and you look at the reductions that were made
net of that um their reduction was actually 5.5%. Um so well above um the 3.5% um that the schools um well actually one and a half% that the schools were required to make. Um so the total
reduction across all departments was 8.1%. A total of 19 administrative positions were eliminated and 62 in other positions were eliminated. When we look at the impacts of the
reductions on the school sites, uh we look at the impact based on a dollar amount. And the reason why we look at it based on a dollar amount is because schools do have flexibility uh within their school budget um to trade off different positions in order to meet the
needs, the specific needs of their school site. Uh so when we look at the first round of reductions, schools reduced uh $30.7 million, a total of 2.1%. And when you look at the second round of reductions, it was a total of 20.2
million, which is 1.4%. The difference between round one and round two allocations is there that in round one the high schools took on a higher percentage of uh the reductions uh that were made at the schools. So
they took a total of the 2.7% whereas elementary took the smallest at 1.5% when comparing to their total budget. The reason for that is that high schools um are much larger. they have much um uh
more they have a much larger budget in addition with supplemental funds that they're receiving. Um so by having more staff they have more flexibility to deal with changes within their school budget. Uh but I didn't want to and in working
with the principal group didn't want to put on that additional burden again um with the high schools taking on um uh a larger portion of the increase in the second round. U so within the second round it's much more um even within the
elementary, middle, and high divisions where the elementary um allocation of that $20.2 2 million reduction. It's 1.3% of the total elementary school budget. Middle is at 1.5. So taking on a
little bit more um than elementary. I mean a little bit more than high um as well as elementary. So middle school is taking on a little bit more in this round um than high schools. And then high schools is taking on less than middle but a little bit more than um
elementary at 1.4%. Uh so the the average is 1.4% across all schools um all levels. Um and the impact the average impact to an elementary school is 82,600.
The average impact to a middle school is $129,600 and the average impact to a high school is 281,800. So it's a total of an average of 120,000 among all schools. Um and it shows that
uh the reduction at elementaryaries is a total of 2.8%. Uh middle schools is 4% and high schools is 4.2%. So an average reduction of school budgets of 3.5% and remember comparing that to to
departments which is having a total reduction of 8.1%. And looking at the legislative uh budget update uh so the base student allocation and this is statewide um is an increase of $85 or 1.58%.
But that base student allocation includes uh the teacher compensation allocation which is TSIA and the legislature doubled it from what they um offered this past year in 2026
was hundred million. They doubled it to $200 million and that equates to approximately 1% if it were to be allocated to all um all teachers evenly. The reason why it's a little less than
this year um is because that um that teacher compensation is allocated proportionally um among district operated schools, charter schools, and family empowerment scholarships or vouchers. Um and as a result of the
increase in vouchers, which we'll see on our our next couple slides, um that's why the district share is lower and represents of $9.8 million. The increase in per student funding is $150 or 1.64%.
Um, and that's statewide. And in looking at what the what that means for Palm Beach, our total increase in funding, because we're looking at since we are looking at declining enrollment in the upcoming year, it's only an increase of $400,000.
And that $400,000 includes the $9.8 8 million that we're required to use for teacher compensation or TSIA um uh salary uh increases. And so as a result of that, we're actually starting
in a deficit of $9.3 million. Uh we also include and this is not part of FFP. It's actually outside of the Florida Education Finance Program. Uh but Palm Beach uh was allocated a
one-time appropriation of $10.7 million and that was for the declining enrollment that loss of over 7,000 students in this current year FY26. So we lost 66 million and we're
receiving uh 10.7 million to help offset uh that declining enrollment that we had in 2026. But that's just a one-time appropriation. Um, when you look statewide, enrollment was down statewide, you know, over
40,000 students and the state had a significant amount of extra money within um the Florida Education Finance Program in FY26. Um, and so they used that extra money or actually I would say a small portion of
what they had in savings in order to allocate those districts that had declining enrollment a one-time appropriation. Uh, the only district that received a higher onetime appropriation than Palm Beach was Miami Dade County Schools. U, so it was Miami Dade, I believe, received $18 million or
is going to receive $18 million if this is approved u by the governor. Um and uh Palm Beach was second on that list at 10.7 million. In looking at the U FFP in detail, we'll
start with row one. So the way that our funding is calculated is by taking and starting with our our weighted FTE. Um so before you get to weighted FTE, uh we start with our unweighted FTE. So, our
unweighted FTE is full-time equivalent students. Um, and that's the reason for that is is not every student is worth one or counts as one. It's really based on the number of eligible courses each
student takes. Um, and so that might fluctuate. So, that's not it's why it's not unweighted students, but it's unweighted FTEES because it's full-time equivalent students. those full-time equivalent students then get converted into what we call weighted full-time
equivalent students. Um the and there are different program weights u that the Florida Department of Ed applies each year. Those weights are adjusted each year uh based on um actual expenditures at at at school districts. They take a
three-year average of our spend um in each program category and they recalculate based on a three-year average what those weights equate to. Um and so for example, uh the weight of a uh of a a
kindergarten through third grade student is more than a middle school student because the class size ratio for a um K through three student is lower than for middle. And so because of that, there's a higher weight that's applied to those
K3 students than a middle school student. Uh there's also additional weights that are applied for um ESOL students. So um English um as a second language students as well as exceptual exceptional um services um students.
There's an additional weight placed on those students. Um those highly weighted students um that that require um really intensive supports, there's a higher weight that's applied to to those students as well.
So those weights are are applied to the unweighted FTE and that's how we get that num that row two line which is the weighted FTE that and that's truly what we're funded on. And when you look at the unweed FTE, it shows that if we were
just looking and and and we're assuming every student is worth one, it's showing that in Palm Beach County, we're going to have an increase of 1,140 students. But that unweighted FTE includes
district operated schools, charter schools, as well as voucher students. So we're really not going to have an increase in district operated or charter schools. We're projected to have a decrease, but the increase in the
vouchers is expected to outnumber the decrease that we're going to see in district operated schools as well as charter schools. And we'll see that on the next slide. Um so we started with 208 students unweighted students
and then that gets that gets increased based on all the weights that are applied based on all the different program factors. So that 28,000 increases to 221,000 based on those weights. Um, we then take
the base student allocation, which when you look at row three is $85, and that's $85 across the state. But when you look at row four, the state then applies what's called the comparable wage factor. That comparable wage factor is
what equates to the cost of living in Palm Beach County. That calculation is also based on a three-year average. And in FY26 it was 3.55%. In FY27
um that is has been decreased to 3.1%. So since our comparable wage factor or cost of living decreased uh by a half of a percent, our base student allocation is not increasing by
$85. It's increasing now because our cost of living factor that is being applied by the state decreased. We're actually getting $6346 in our base student allocation or 1.14%.
Uh so you take that weighted FTE, you multiply that times the adjusted base student allocation after that cost, that comparable wage factor is applied and that gets you, you know what our base funding is. And you'll see that base
funding is increasing by $16 million. So just remember that $16 million um because what's also included within that $16 million is the state setting aside $13 million of that and saying you need
to spend that on um teacher compensation or the TSIA categorical. And so the majority of the base student allocation, which is the most flexible part of the um funding formula, is set aside
specifically for um the the uh TSIA or the teacher compensation categorical. When you look at uh row nine, row nine is the academic accelerations option. Um, and so if you uh recall from last
year, that used to be uh the additional funding that um our district would receive for our uh participation in advanced placement, ACE, industry certification and dual enrollment programs.
We previously to uh to last year, we would we meaning districts would be funded an additional amount amount based on the number of students that passed each of those accelerated programs. And we based on the number of of FTE that
passed based on the number of courses that were passed by students in those particular programs we would get whatever that number happened to be you know say a thousand students it would be a thousand students multiplied by that base student allocation that's in row
five. And so if you had more students um pass you'd receive more funding. And if there was an increase in the base student allocation, you'd receive more funding because there was also an increase in the base student allocation.
What the legislature did last year is initially they said we're just spending way too much money on those advanced uh placement um uh supplemental funds that we're allocating to districts. So initially uh both the house and the senate were po proposing to completely
eliminate receiving any additional money relating to um those advanced uh that advanced coursework that is very has been a very much a high priority in Palm Beach County. There was a lot of push back um mainly
by um the parents for concerns that these programs could potentially be cut. Um, and there is such a benefit for this advanced coursework um that the legislature then put it back into the funding formula, but they added it back as a categorical instead of having it
fluctuate uh with the actual pass rate, the actual number of students that pass. Um, so now it's an actual just a categorical and you can see that what they're doing in FY27 is they're saying, "Okay, we're going to give you the money, but we're going to
give you the exact same money that you received in FY26." So they So now, if we end up having more students pass, we're still receiving the exact same amount of money. So if you take that same pot of money and you allocate it over more students, you're
going to end up receiving less per student. And so out of that funding, schools are required to pay for before they can use it for anything else to help provide supplemental services to the students. they have to fund specific bonuses that are outlined in statute for
for those teachers based on the pass rate as well as for the exams uh related uh to those adv additional advanced um uh programs. Um so although we are very happy that they've continued to fund and
not remove this funding, it does result in less funding at the at the school sites. uh when you look at the actual per student allocation, it's no longer aligned to that base student allocation. It's recalculated each year based on the number of students actually pass based
on a fixed pot of money. And then since Palm Beach County was already at the top in terms of offering this advanced coursework, a lot of other districts are really catching up with Palm Beach County. So, as more districts start
offering and getting more students to pass this advanced coursework, we end up even though we're increasing, we can't increase as much because we're we've we're already offering almost as much as we can, our proportional share of the total allocation statewide is being
reduced. And so, that's what happened this past year in FY26. uh we ended up having a nearly $5 million reduction in our allocation. Even though we had an increase in the number of students that passed uh because we were already at the top of
the list, there were so many other district that that were not really taking advantage of this advanced coursework now starting to offer it which then reduced we we then had a smaller proportional share allocated to
us. All right. All right. So, I know that's confusing. If anyone has any other questions, you know, please feel free to stop me um at any time. Um in looking at the total state funding, so we'll jump down to road 22. Uh total state funding
is um is being reduced by 5.8 million. State funding is usually offset by an increase in local funding. And that's where we jump forward to the local funding. So you can see our total local funding is increasing by $41
million. And you would think that's great. We're going to increase funding by $41 million. But that's where you need to um uh jump down and look at the actual proportion of the enrollment breakdown to see uh if
we're truly going to have, you know, where that increase of $41 million, where is it going to actually show up? Uh and so when you look at the enrollment breakdown in row 27, you can see that district operated schools are projected at the state level to decline
by 2500 students, charter schools by 200, but the um the voucher and the family empowerment scholarship is projected to increase by 3,900. So, so you can see that the vouchers are
growing by more than uh the loss expected at the district operated and charter schools. So, that's why there's an increase in within Palm Beach County of,00 even though we're seeing a loss in district operated schools. Um so at the
state level the projected loss in district enrollment is like I said 2500. We are projecting a slightly larger loss uh closer to um uh 2900 students approximately is what we're projecting our our loss in enrollment to be uh for
the upcoming year. Um so even though charter schools are um decreasing enrollment um they are going to have a slight increase u uh expected to have a slight increase in their allocation of a million dollars. So a
million dollars of that 41 million is going to the increase charter school pass through even though they're looking at declining enrollment. Um, but the largest portion of it, $40 million, is going to be passed through to family empowerment scholarships or vouchers.
So, that $41.6 million after we back out the increase in charter schools, um, even though they're having a decline in enrollment and after we back out, uh, the the, uh, increase in what's going to be passed through for the vouchers, uh, district operated schools are looking at
an increase of $400,000. And that includes uh the uh Florida teacher uh compensation categorical or the TSIA and our share of that 13 million uh which is required to be used
uh for TSIA the share for district operated schools is 9.8 million. So if we have to pay 9.8 million but only have 400,000 that leaves a deficit of 9.4 million. Um, so that's a a brief update on where
we're at with the uh the general fund and Miss Evans is going to give a quick update on the changes in the capital plan from our last meeting uh that we had the capital which was in January. >> Good good morning everyone. Um capital plan update this year was actually
pretty easy. Um if you remember when we went through this in January um last year's plan was 11 years and so we've shrinking it down to 10 years. We so we don't really have to add a new year in. We're required to do a five-year capital plan. We expanded it to 10 when we did
the first sales tax referendum and we've kept it that way. But when we added the new sales tax in, we expand the plan to incorporate the full life of that sales tax. So we bumped it out to 12, dropped back to 11, and now back to 10. Um, and there were not any big significant
changes. There's no new projects being added into the plan. Um it was really looking at everything that's in the plan and making adjustments based on cost escalation. Um updated priorities re we do do a deep dive annually of every line
item in the plan but this year was a little easier in terms of changes. We will be and this is not reflected in the capital plan that was attached. Um that's a change that we're making right now. We had planned to borrow money for three projects. the historic Roosevelt
phase two, historic Carver phase two, and Northtech River Beach Prep modernization. Those projects were all on the sales tax referendum list. And now that the 2017 tax has ended, we've received the final revenues. We've looked at the interest earns to date and
we've looked at um the projects that are still coming and updated what we think it's going to cost to finish them because we did have significant cost escalation over the last nine years. Um we believe there's enough money in the sales tax to fund these projects. So um
we're eliminating the planned borrowing for next year and shifting these projects into the sales tax. We've already discussed this with the sales tax oversight committee and they gave us a tenative approval. Um they'll finally they'll approve this um as a plan modification um and
recommendation of the schoolboard as part of the adoption of the capital plan. As we move toward final adoption, we will be updating revenue projections and um final project budgets, closing things out, shifting budgets around. There's quite a bit of work still to be done,
but we have a good draft that was attached to this document um to our project today. If you can go to the next slide. Oh, okay. um the capital plan changes that we had and I'll try to go through this and the construction department could do this much better than me but
I'll do my best at explaining the changes. There was a project for DD Eisenhower um ancillary that is a building we play we modernized DD Eisenhower and built them a new school but there was one building um that was not old enough to justify tearing it
down u but it's not being used by the school so we're doing renovations to that and updating it so it can be used in as an ancillary site one of the regional offices I believe will be moving in there um what we found as we're getting closer to awarding the
contract is um we thought there was some minor roof repairs. Instead, the entire roof needs to be replaced. The windows need to be replaced. There was more work to be done than expected. So, that project's going up by $2 million. Um the three transportation centers, those
costs have gone up um significantly. When they were originally estimated back in 2016 for the sales tax, um they were really underbudgeted. We had not built a bus compound in 15 years. and the needs have changed, the costs
have gone up significantly. They are in the design phase for these projects. Um, and they're working through the costs. So, they're dealing with increased scope, um, more techn more technology, more things in the centers than were in
the old ones. Um, and the costs have gone up as well. So, those three projects will be funded from the sales tax. Uh, but there are some pretty significant increases for all three of those this year. River Beach High School um which is set to start construction in FY28.
Um they've gone through and adjust adjusted the budget for that school as well and there's an increase there expected of 45 million bringing that up to 195 million total. Um then we have other projects that are not construction. Um, there's equipment.
We've added an additional $8 million in for school furniture. And this was really due to we want to make sure that there's a 10-year refresh cycle for student and teacher furniture. Um, there is those the furniture has a 10-year
warranty on it. Students can be very rough on the furniture and it really does need to be replaced on a regular schedule. We're building that out and a lot of this was done with the last sales tax. But when we did the last sales tax, it looked at schools that were older and
all the furniture needed to be replaced. It did not include schools that were less than 10 years old. So now those schools are all 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 years old and their furniture needs to be replaced. So we need a one-time bump up of this. And this is a one-time increase
for school furniture. And then we'll be flushing that out through the capital plan to make sure that we have money to replace that furniture every 10 years. And then Choice um we've done an increase. And this numbers I should point out these numbers are all over 10
years. This is not a one-year adjustment with the exception of the school furniture refresh. Choice is actually going up by $125,000 a year. Their budget has been about $250,000 a year. Um it's and it hasn't changed in 15 or 20 years. So, they needed an adjustment.
Um, this is used to refresh equipment needed in the choice programs. So, it's actually only 125,000 a year, but it rounds up to 1.3 million over 10 years. And for technology, um, the refresh of the classroom technology, this is the flat panels, the
overhead projectors, document imaging cameras that the schools use. We're going to over the next 10 years replace the flat panels that are in all the schools. and we purchased those in 2018. So this will be done probably in years
three, four, and five of the capital plan. So those costs have gone up and we needed to increase the budget to make sure that can be funded. Again, this is over a 10-year window. And for servers, these are the the servers storing all the data for all of our schools and
district offices. And those technology costs have have really skyrocketed in the last year. We're hoping they drop back down or stabilize, but we're building in a $3 million increase again across 10-year window to cover the cost of the servers. The other the only other change I wanted to point out in the
capital plan is there are three schools that were in the plan for years um four, five, and six, we've pushed them out um into the year 6 through 10 window pending enrollment stabilization. Before we look at building new schools, we need
to make sure that we're they're needed and where they're needed at. So, we've pushed these three schools out. We haven't taken them out of the plan, but we need to get see the enrollment stabilize and then determine if the schools are needed and if they are needed, where they're needed. Um, one of
those schools is a K8 in the West Delray area. That may end up being converted to additions at middle schools if they're needed. It's hard to find land in that part of the county. So there's there's a lot of work to be done with those three schools. So we've pushed them into the last five years of the 10-year plan. And
that's really everything with the capital plan. Um we will have the final one ready for adoption in August. I believe we will. And then I do want to add another meeting for the committee. We weren't
expecting to have um a special session uh for it to go this late. Um and then also with the um the second round of of reductions um you know working through those changes. Uh so I would like to add another u meeting make it virtual on
June 10th um at 9:00 a.m. So I'm going to send that out to the the committee members and make sure that will work for everybody so we can have a quorum. Um if not I'll select another date and I'll I'll keep it virtual uh in order to to give the committee members as much much
uh flexibility as possible. Um so then we'll we'll attach the the capital plan. Um and then uh from there we'll also go over the report to the board. Um and that is the one requirement of the committee is to um have a report as to
whether the committee supports u the recommendations and the budget. um submitted by uh on behalf of the superintendent uh to the board and looking at just our other considerations for FY27
um we will be uh looking at uh enrollment you know that is the big question you know we had a very uh significant decrease unexpected unprecedented uh decrease in enrollment in FY26 we're monitoring enrollment very closely
um going into FY27. We already projected there was there will be a decrease. Um we don't um anticipate having that same level of reduction that we saw in FY26. Uh but we do anticipate to just um have that
actual uh impact that um is no longer being offset by the growth we had previously. Um, so we're we're seeing declines just due to declining u birth rate um as well as just cost of living and and people moving out of the uh out
of the county. Um we do have some students, you know, this past year about 1,800 or so of the students were uh left public school to go to um a private school, but by far the majority was related to other uh demographic uh
shifts. So, we're closely monitoring enrollment um and and like I said have been um put we put procedures um and process in place to really try to enroll uh grow our enrollment in the upcoming year or reduce the the potential loss of
enrollment um that we're we're projected to have. Uh so we have finally the the state education budget. It's in the cooling off period. It will be uh finalized by tomorrow. Um, and then we'll also be able to see by that next
meeting whether the governor has vetoed any of the bills and I can give a final legislative update um uh in that June meeting as well. Uh hopefully if the governor has gone through and and signed everything um he officially has until uh the end of June. We need to have a final
signed budget by uh July 1st. Uh we're monitoring u the the federal level. We do receive federal grant programs. Uh we do know the funding is staying level, although based on our decline in enrollment, our percentage allocation
may end up being less. U so we're just waiting um uh to see what our actual uh funding levels will be uh for each of those uh federal grant programs. Uh in looking at uh other items that impact
the budget, uh so we have cost of health care. Uh we had a three-year proposal uh that we agreed to uh with the union groups uh that uh that spell out how much of the premium increase the district will be absorbing. So the
impact in FY27 is $ 8.6 million. Uh we also have um increases in our instructional materials budget not in FY27 but these are considerations for 28 29 and 30. Um, and then, uh, we do have
a slight increase in FPL. Um, and so that is going to go up by $2.1 million. But we have worked hard uh we have worked hard to balance the shortfall um in FY u the the shortfall
created in FY26 u by the the reductions that we're making uh within uh the the first round of reductions as well as the second round of reductions. We will be balancing the budget u deficit that we have in FY26. We are planning to spend
down fund balance in FY26, but with the changes that we're making, uh we will be flat going into FY27. Other than dealing with um the funding that we're receiving at the state level. Uh but once you take into consideration
u the changes that we're uh making or that will be applied because of the decline in enrollment, I do anticipate uh that our FY27 budget would be flat. Uh but that does not include any um salary increase you know other than
looking at what's available for TSIA um because it's really truly dependent on what happens with enrollment and if enrollment if the decline in enrollment is less than what we projected that frees up additional money and so if enrollment is more than what was
projected we're going to have an even larger deficit. So it's really truly dependent. Our revenue is driven based on enrollment. So we are monitoring that very closely. Uh so I already went through an overview of what the key dates are. Uh we'll
receive our certification of property values on July 1st. Uh we're required to the Florida Department of Ed uh will certify what our millage rates are that are set by the state legislature by July 19th. tenative budget adoption
uh which will uh potentially include approval of the capital plan. U so and if we don't make it to the July 29th meeting for the capital plan uh it will be added to the August meeting and then final a budget adoption is on uh
September 9th. I have a more detailed timeline that I did update uh based on uh the changes um of now going through adding in the special session um in that April May uh
time frame and then um also the reook of school budgets again in the month of June. Um and again just truly highlighting you know the tenative budget adoption even though our fiscal year starts July 1st tenative budget adoption which is driven by state
statute is not until uh July 29th. Um final budget adoption is on September 9th. Our 11th day of school which is the point in time uh that we uh we take what our enrollment is and then we readjust all of our school staffing based on
enrollment on the 11th day. That day is August 24th. Uh but we are monitoring enrollment. Um you know, we're moni monitoring it on on a daily basis. Uh so with that, I would like to uh open it up to the committee uh for any
questions. All right. And so it doesn't seem like there's any questions. We did at the last minute um lose our quorum, so we won't be able to take a vote on the minutes. Uh but what we'll do is we can do that on our next meeting. Uh so I
will send out the meeting invite for uh June 10th at 9:00 a.m. and I'll see if that works for the committee members. Um if I'm not able to get a quorum for that date, I will propose a new date um for the the committee. Um, and so, you know,
it's not usual that, you know, well, I guess recently it's been usual we have a special session. Uh, but it would have been nice if the budget had been done by the legislature back in March. U, but, uh, they always like to keep us on the edge of our seat. Uh, but we will by that June 10th meeting just be able to
have things more finalized and I'll work with the chair to have a draft report to the board um, so that the committee will have something to review and to provide feedback on. Um if you have any questions um that you have between now
and that meeting, please reach out to me. Um I can provide you any additional information uh that you need um uh if there's anything uh any anything that in this presentation uh where you just need additional clarification uh please feel
free to reach out to me. Um I want to thank each of the committee members and and Miss Branch for uh participating today. Um it's been a definitely a challenging budget year. Um and and we're looking forward to what happens
with our enrollment going into FY27. Um so again, thank you. Thank you to the committee uh for your participation. And with that, um the meeting is adjourned.