Regular Meeting of the Bridgeport Board of Education Tue 5/26/2026

001I pledge allegiance and justice for all. For all. Thank you. Miss Estela Jimenez, can you take the roll call? Sure. Um Mr. Ben Graham Ellis. Okay. Miss Brooks Jennings. Present online. Okay. Mr. Daniels. Um online Mr. Medina. Present. Thank you. Yeah. Miss Perez. Present. Mr. Sakalovic. Present. Mr. Trapper. And Mr. Woodson. Okay. And we have a quorum. Thank you. We're going to take the student representative reports. We'll go with in-person reports first. So, Mr. Bika. Okay. Good evening members of the Board of Education, superintendent, faculty, and everyone in attendance. My name is Christian Bika and I am a 12th grader at the magnet program of Central High School. I would like to share several updates and accomplishments from my school. Today I was one of many Bridgeport Public School students recognized by the Rotary Club

002of Bridgeport for our achievements and contributions. And at the end of the day, Central held its honor roll recognition ceremony in the auditorium and this honors students who achieved honor roll status for all three marking periods consecutively throughout the school year. We've also officially concluded AP testing for the year and we commend all students who participated for their dedication and hard work. On May 22nd, we held our senior scholarship awards ceremony where we recognized graduating seniors for their academic achievements and their scholarships earned. Scholarships from Bridgeport Caribe Youth Leaders, the Rotary Club of Bridgeport, the BPT Board of Education, and First Choice Seals were awarded to many deserving students. In athletics, our boys volleyball team qualified for both the FCIAC and CIAC state tournaments and will continue competing in the state playoffs next week. Additionally,

003several of our track and field athletes have qualified for the state tournament and we wish them continued success. Student activities also continue to remain active across the community. On May 28th, Central will host its annual chess tournament in the cafeteria, welcoming students to participate in friendly competition and school engagement. Tomorrow, May 26th, Central will hold both its National Honor Society Induction Ceremony and Senior Recognition to honor our students' leadership and academic excellence. Tomorrow, our students will have the opportunity to attend Caribe's annual trade fair, which is a designed to expose us to various career pathways and opportunities within the trades. CHS's senior prom will take place this Friday at the Woodwinds in Branford and we are looking forward to an enjoyable and memorable evening. We're also excited to announce that senior yearbooks have officially arrived

004and will be distributed during the pre-prom senior breakfast on May 29th. Additionally, we are currently discussing the next steps for the Interact Club chapter, including officer elections and preparations for our end-of-the-year celebration on June 9th. Finally, graduation for the Central High School class of 2026 will be confirmed to take place on June 18th still. Thank you. Thank you. Congratulations. Lose them? Want to take a quick pause or Mhm. Take a quick pause. You're ready? >> All right. Sorry, we lost you for a minute, guys, but we're back. Everybody back on? Yeah, so uh Deborah, are you on? Yes, I'm here. All right, you can go now. Okay, thank you. Can you see me? Uh yes. Okay. So, good evening members of the board and of education. I'm a I'm an 11th grader and I'm representing

005Bridgeforth Military Academy. So, as we approach the close of the school year, Bridgeforth Military Academy continues to focus on maintaining academic progress and providing meaningful experience for our students. This summer, we will be assigned both reading and math work to support continued learning and prevent what is commonly referred as the summer slide, which is the loss of academic progress during approximately 10 weeks when school is not in session. While our students have made strong gains this year, many are still working towards reaching working towards reaching the same academic levels as their peers in surrounding community communities, particularly as they prepare for the college and career opportunities. Uh we are proud to report the successful complete completion of end-of-year assessment with outstanding participation of 99% complete of NWEA, 97% for NHSS assessment, and 97% for Reading

006Plus. Those results reflect both the commitment of our students and the dedication of our staff. In addition to academics, students participated in engaging field experience including trips on May 14th to the Springfield University Art Museum and the Peabody Museum for science and social studies learning. On May 15th, our physical education department hosted a trip to Discovery Adventure Park promoting teamwork, fitness, and outdoor learning. This past week showcased students leadership and school spirit. On Thursday, May 21st, our Johnson and Bigelow Corps and Navy JROTC team proudly served as the color guard at the Housatonic and Gateway Community College graduated graduation ceremonies representing BMA with professional and professionalism and pride. On Friday, May 22nd, we conducted a fire drill to reinforce safety protocols following by our monthly company competitions. Students competed with enthusiasm and the final results

007were first place Foxtrot with 3,500 points, second place Alpha with 3,400 points, third place Charlie with 3,300 points, and fourth place Bravo with 3,000 points. Looking ahead, we are preparing for several important events. Our rescheduled award ceremony will take place on Thursday with seniors and juniors recognized in the morning and sophomores and freshmen in the afternoon. On Friday, we will conclude our company competition session with a final reward award ceremony to celebrate students' achievement and teamwork. Thank you for continued support of Bridge Preparatory Academy and our students. Thank you, Deborah. All right. I don't see any other students online. So, thank you both for your updates for us. Um we're going to go on to uh we do not have public comment um anybody signed up, so we'll just move on to uh chairperson's report.

008I do acknowledge that Mr. Bennehan Grijalva has joined the meeting and Mr. Woodson both online and Mr. Medina's in person now. Um so with that said, we'll move on. Um so the only update I have on the uh progress of the state intervention is uh we I did send a a an update on the 22nd to uh the Deputy Commissioner uh uh Hughes and his team. Uh you guys are all CC'd on that email. It just showed the updates uh for the year um in regards to our the goals that we set this time last year, actually, and how um the progress we've made towards those goals. And so, you can see that in your email. Um we are in the process of the our of completing the RFP. I asked the um the remaining

009board members please complete them um tonight and or no later than tomorrow. We have our we have to meet this week to um choose a a firm. So, if they're not completed tomorrow, your votes won't count on in terms of the evaluations. Um and so, when we when we do meet. Um so, please complete that if you are still um on the list of incompletes. And that's all I have for um my updates in regards to the uh state intervention. Uh is there any questions about that? Seeing none, I'm um we'll move on to uh committee reports and referrals. The Operations Committee will meet next week on the I believe it's the sec- the third. Um bless you. On June 3rd. And uh we'll have the updates for the budget on that night as well

010as um I believe there's uh referral for nutrition uh nutrition update. So, if there's any further referrals, please let me know now. Okay. So, next week we'll have those updates. Uh moving on, we have the Instructional Support Services Committee, Mr. Traynor. Uh ISS is meeting tomorrow night uh first regular meeting. Uh agenda is out uh on posted online. Um we're looking at the PAC PTSO spending for the year, and we're looking uh at SPED having an extensive discussion on SPED reorganization and what we're doing in the district. Any referrals to Mr. Traynor? Mr. Sefcovic? >> [clears throat] >> Yeah, um Eid al-Adha It's tomorrow. Is Is on the agenda? It's tomorrow. Oh. It's not on the agenda. Is it going to be discussed tomorrow at the meeting? Well, I would like to refer Eid al-Adha

011as a holiday back to your committee cuz we left it up in the air. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Medina? Thank you. Yeah, I just wanted to just confirm. I thought I put that over to your committee with the uh the other thing. You were going to handle that. What wrong? What are you talking about? The I had the the the holiday that I wanted to get a committee made to to go through that stuff. And I thought you had those two referrals, that one and also >> me Did you email that to me? No, it was never a question for email. I did it in one of the meetings. Um I'll look back. Okay. Yeah. Mr. Traynor. And which committee are you referring to cuz >> he's talking about the operations committee. >> Pardon me? I

012think he's talking about the operations committee. Okay, I don't understand operations. I had asked that it be referred to policy. Okay. Cuz I you know, the the way in which we add holidays >> be a policy, I think. >> needs a policy. It that's what we when it we discussed it in my committee meeting it struck me that you know, my my argument in the discussion when it was there, Joe was is that there's no policy in the board for how we add a new holiday. And you know, that came up in the discussion that we did have in my committee which is how do we decide to add new holidays? Um and how do we decide whether we keep holidays? How do we change holidays? Um we had that whole um uh uh whatever

013you want to call it about Columbus Day, Indigenous Peoples Day, Italian Heritage Day that we went through a few years back um and sort of how we decide these things. And adding new holidays, the governor then foisted a holiday on us last year. Uh state national holidays, but within ourselves, how do we control and decide what holidays we want to add? And do we have a policy for reorganizing? Do we have a policy for how many holidays we have? All that sort of stuff. And that was what came up in the end that we did have at my committee meeting. So, I thought that I said at the time that I thought it needed to be referred to the policy committee meeting. Through the chair. Uh yes, Mr. Medina. Uh that's why the my recommendation

014was to add to having a I had committee to talk about that, to sit down and talk about the discussion. >> committee, you said? >> Yes. That's what the recommendation that you had. >> No, I sent it to you because you said that you it could be because I wanted to do it I had committee just to have those discussions to figure out exactly almost everything that Mr. Traver said. Uh so, I wasn't there in that meeting, I guess, when it was being discussed. So, that's why I was thinking what the maybe chair start. Mhm. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Khalid. Yeah, Madam Chair. I think that's actually better idea than putting it on policy because policy has like a whole lot of work to do, so. And then, there's going to be a It's going

015to be a little bit of a lift to come up if people want to come up with a whole calendar protocol and committee rather than just approve it as we've been doing in the past and just have It's like a in here if we want to just um create a whole new policy rather than doing it the way we do it just approving a calendar as as a board. We've had the right to going forward in the past. We've never really had a policy or protocol and we did add holidays before and reject holidays before without a whole thing. But, if we want to If we want to do it by a committee level, it seems like it's going to take some work and some debate back and forth, so I think it should be

016a committee on its own of a cat just to look at the entire calendar. As Mr. Medina suggested, I think that's a good idea. Mr. Traver. Yeah, I this was in the context of the fact that we had already voted on the calendar for next year. And so, the calendar had been decided. And the addition of a new holiday for next year had already been in the holidays for next year had been approved by the full board. And so uh this was the idea was to brief you know determine a policy and then prepare for the following year when we would if we were so inclined add this holiday to our calendar. We'll we'll put on the next agenda. All right. Um We'll go on any further referrals for instructional support services. I'll go on

017to policy committee. The policy committee, Mr. Whitson. Mr. Whitson. We'll circle back um by the end of it to see if you're available. Um ad hoc committee, so Mr. Traynor. The advocacy committee. The uh ad hoc advocacy committee held um what I believe is its final meeting of this year uh this past Wednesday um to sort of sum things up, talk about how we did, where we're going. Um We uh uh had a good meeting last Wednesday of a lot of uh key players in the community um and talked about what we need to do to get ready for the next year. Um so I thought it was a good discussion um and we intend to keep meeting with individuals and groups in the community to start getting ready. Um One of the things that

018we uh talked about was you know, how well we did do this year. Um and how to build on that for next year because next year is obviously the im- critically important fight. Um it's the um long session where the biennial budget will be established. Um and that's where the big money is. And that's the big money that we need to address. Um and uh the governor has created his blue ribbon commissioner committee to study it. And that's his way of deflecting, but um that will supposedly come up with a report before the session starts. That'll be a factor. But in the end, it's the long session where they establish the budget. And that's where the big money is. Um what we did this year was um extraordinary in sense that we got money that

019we didn't expect to get from the state. Um and we got money from the city that we've never seen in the 30 years that I've been doing this. Um so we need to build on that for the next year uh with within Bridgeport and then outside of Bridgeport with other cities and towns throughout the state. And that's what we talked about doing and we'll continue to build on. And presumably start at the beginning of the year. Um we started, you know, obviously after the new year in January February this year because that's when the committee was formed. So Thank you. Mr. Secola Yeah, um I have a couple questions. I do got a referral but if you're not going to meet I Um because we still I do have a referral but if you're not

020going to meet I don't know how to get this up because we got $5 million in bonding that's sitting out there that we still need to speak up for that's still dangling in the ether that where the city has to prove that they don't need supplemental funding, but the entire state just proved that they do need supplemental funding. So, I think we can bring pressure onto the governor by advocating for that $5 million as a whole group, as a whole city, the same way we advocated for everything else because we still got a bit of a gap and that $5 million could close the entire gap. And second, I think we should have influence in the beginning of the Blue Ribbon Committee and meet with people and try to speak with the delegates and the

021people on the committee and give our suggestions and what Bridgeport needs for those. So, I think we should be on the ground level of that and somehow come up with a strategy. I didn't hear that second one. Ending uh working towards influencing the Blue Ribbon Committee. And well, our position statements and what have you of the Bridgeport Public Schools. Let me start with the first and the second. And an ad hoc committee has a beginning and an end. As the year expires, the ad hoc committee expires in my mind. Uh I discussed that and reported it at the last meeting uh that I thought the ad hoc committee was expiring. I'm expecting that the chair will start it up again at the beginning of the next year. I haven't had a chance to sit down

022with the chair to discuss that, but that's the the decision of the chair. Right. Many committees also meetings meetings do as I have I'm >> [clears throat] >> I I'm assuming that the chair will make that decision, but I haven't had the chance to discuss it down with the chair and discuss that, but she had asked me about that and I had answered her question to say that I thought we were going to be wrapping things up uh for the summer. It didn't mean that we weren't going to individually be working as I just described in my report. There'll be individuals doing work to get ready for the fall. But as a committee, we're not going to be meeting. We're not going to be having meetings um over the summer per se. Um so we're

023not going to be posting meetings and conducting meetings. Uh, so there's that. Um, I secondly, as you know, cuz you yourself have been suggesting it, there are other people, some of us will be going up to watch what the Blue Ribbon Commission is doing, um, monitoring it, how we might use that or not use that is something we still need to think about and observe. Um, you have an opinion about what to do with it. I may or may not agree with your opinion when we I see what it's going to be doing and where the whether or not it's a useful thing to try and influence or not influence. The $5 million, it seems to me, is tied into, um, the whole discussion that we haven't had yet because we haven't had a chance

024to hear a full report on the MARB money cuz that's OPM. And OPM is what we're going to hear. The MARB report, the the the the part of the law that set up MARB, um, is a subdivision of OPM. The the money that was set up in the bond bill last year, the $5 million, was done through OPM. The aborted meeting that you saw on video, that shared with us on video from the Cape conference last fall, a year ago, was, um, uh, through OPM. Um, so presumably that money is sitting somewhere in OPM and as the law sets up a this subdivision of MARB in the State Department of Ed, um, we need to deal with that, try and deal with that, it seems to me, through that avenue of State Department of Ed

025OPM quote sub chapter of of OPM, um, to see if we can access that $5 million, which supposedly died after that year because the law was written that it had to be done by a certain date. Now, we can still try and find it. There's lots of money available through OPM, as I've been told. But again, this is all speculation on our part to try and figure out how to access it. But uh to me, that's it. I don't disagree with you, but that's the board as a whole figuring out how we want to monitor that when we have the discussion that we've all agreed we want to have with the designated which hasn't been done yet, to my knowledge, um person from the State Department of Ed designated State Department of Ed {slash} OPM

026representatives. Yeah, um Mr. Kalbick Yeah, just just for a point of information and clarification, that $5 million is still available. There was no expiration date. I've read the bill back to forward. I've talked to several people. That money is still there. We were supposed to have another meeting with them. It's totally separate from the New Mar. This is why it's important for us to continue advocating cuz that money is still there. And that expiration the real the reality of expiration is that after we could not bring pressure on the governor anymore, and he doesn't he's not running, that money will be gone forever. So, I thought it would be viable to have a meeting in June for the ad hoc committee, like every other committee does, and usually expires at the end of the year.

027Every other committee is meeting in June. So, I figured we could discuss this at the ad hoc committee, come together, have a meeting of the minds, and bring that same pressure for that $5 million that we brought for everything else. And that's all I got. And if we're not going to hold a meeting, I would like to re-refer that to um Finance. Finance, please. Thank you. Okay, just send that in an email to me. Yes. Um Mr. Benehan, do you have anything for your ad hoc committee for the facility master plan? Um thank you, Madam Chair. April 30th we have a meeting with the master plan with our George Garcia of facility. Uh, he presented us our information, you know, what's going on with Richmond Public Schools and about the budget and also, um, Mr.

028PJ, um, gave the information about what's going on, what we're going to be the process about the schools because, um, just for the record and like to know and be but everybody understand that we are not going to be closing the school because people they think we go closing school and we are not going closing the school. So, in that meeting we had information clear and all PJ and Kevin and, you know, send information very clear. Thank you, Madam Chair. Do you have another meeting date? Sorry? Do you have another date for your next meeting? >> date I will let you know on the 100 first. So, as soon as I have someone I'll let you know. Okay. Um, Mr. Wilson, are you available? I was going to say send any referrals. Oh, there he

029goes. Mr. Wilson, for your policy committee? Yeah, I don't have any updates and, um, I don't I don't even know when the next meeting is. So, I I guess we'll be I will go ahead and y'all uh, send an email for when the next meeting, um, policy will be. Thanks. Alrighty. Um, Cool. K. Oh, Ms. Esterman Hernandez, uh, CAP report, uh, CAP report. Yeah, the >> [clears throat] >> I reported everything on last time, but I did, um, want to reference a few webinars that CAP is actually hosting, one of which is about effective meetings and Robert Rules of Orders. Um, um, and that's actually tomorrow during lunch time and then there's a few other, um, webinars around like governance and how to use the Ed site, um, to help with like local decisions on

030discussions and decisions. So, there's a few webinars out there um that might be useful for for folks. And that's all. Did anybody attend the Day on the Hill or not the Day on the Hill, the legislative update? No, okay. All right, that's fine. If anybody did, I wanted to give them a chance to speak to it. Um all right, we'll move on then. Uh the next item uh Dr. Avery is not here today, so there um is no report. However, his team did come up and uh give us uh the sub the substitute house bill uh 52 53 23. That was um it just gives updates on and it you can correct me uh Mr. Carrafa missing anything, but it's giving an update on the use of Fairchild Wheeler uh to house BMA um going

031forward next year. Is it temporary? Temp- temporarily housing BMA while um Wintergreen is being redone. I I can't think of the word. Re- remodeled? Rebuilt rebuilt? Um and so uh BMA is going to be moving into the Fairchild uh campus. And uh that information will be going out to families and the school uh the community school community tomorrow tomorrow. Um and so we wanted to make sure you guys have an update um on that. So, some light reading tonight if you want to read the whole bill, it's in front of you. And those online, it's uh health bill 53 23. Um public act number 26-139. All right, so moving on uh is there approval for the consent agenda? Or motion for this >> So move Move by Mr. Medina. Seconded by Mr. Bennehan. Miss Estremera

032Jimenez, sorry. I have two edits to the um meeting minutes. Okay, go ahead. Um on page uh on page two, it references Bridge Road Military Academy needs to be added. So, that's on page two. And then towards the I think it's page 13, it references um in the section where it says Mr. Medina moved to revise policy 2131A as discussed, um it needs to be added that Mr. Sakalovic seconded that motion. And that's all the edits I have. Any further discussion on that? Okay, so all in favor as amended say I. I. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay. Uh we'll move on to new business. Uh the first item is the item for executive session. Um it's a request for approval of workman's comp settlement for um Arcolone. And if we go into executive session,

033we'll be going in with uh attorney Yolmans. Um and the board. And possibly Dr. Siano? Yeah, and Dr. Siano. Um so, is there a motion? So moved. Second session for this comp settlement for with Arcolone. The motion was made by Mr. Sakalovic without a microphone, and then seconded by Mr. Bennehan. Uh all in favor say I. I. I. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Those of you online, please join the executive session link and we'll be back. >> Mhm. >> All right, we're back from executive session. Um, it is 7:27. Is there a motion to be made? Assistant Mayor Jimenez? Yeah. Motion to authorize and approve the workers compensation settlement as discussed in executive session for our colony. Is there a second? Second, Mr. Medina. Any further debate? All in favor can say I. I, Mr.

034Medina. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? That motion carries. Thank you, Ms. Yeomans. She's not back in the but thank you to the attorney. Um Next we have the approval for the emergency contract to repair the chiller at Central High School, Ms. McArdle. Good evening. Hello. Hello. [clears throat] This um this contract is um pretty much an emergency. It's urgent. We did a qualified purchase, which means um we didn't go through the bidding process. The reason for that was um it's air conditioning and we need it to be working at Central High School. Um one of the reasons is we have that brand new gym floor that's wood and we don't want that to buckle. And another reason is um air quality and environmental issues that um could occur if there's not air conditioning. Currently, there

035are two chillers at Central High School. One chiller is only working right now. The second chiller, one compressor needs to be replaced fully and the other compressor needs to be repaired. The company Hi-Tech installed these chillers when they did renovate as new back in 2015 at Central and they maintain these chillers on a quarterly basis for us um since it's been installed. So, we reached out to them for a quote. We also did our due diligence and we reached out to one other contractor that's in the area that could work on this type of chiller, F&F Mechanical. Um Hi-Tech's quote came in a third of the cost of F&F Mechanical and we're asking for this contract to be expedited. It's $66,000 um and he can have it here within weeks, the equipment and repairs. Um

036this did not uh again this didn't go through committee so I'll give everybody opportunity to um to ask any questions because of the emergency factor. That's why we didn't put it off for next week. So Mr. Sakalaukas. Uh yes, a couple of questions. This is These are relatively new chillers. Uh how long do chillers usually last before they fail? What are the common issues like >> about 15 years. We did look for a quote to replace the chiller and we submitted that in our capital plan. Um each chiller um is about $500,000. So And what what >> We're at $66,000 we think would be a deal and it's deal. What kind of warranties do we get for these for the chillers if the expected life's If the warranty is usually with new construction is for

037the first year. So Basix chillers will be coming up in a year. In a few months I mean. >> Wow. I I'm I mean you would ex- you would expect them to work a lot longer than they're working and what we're doing now. They they do but Central High School is highly um used so they're constantly working there so the compressors do eventually fail from working so hard depending on the load and the heat. I want to say thank you. Mr. Traynor. I move to approve the emergency contract to repair the chiller at Central High School. Second. Moved by Mr. Traynor seconded by Mrs. Ramirez. Um any further debate? All in favor say aye. >> I have a comment. >> Oh sorry. Don't vote yet. Just just to be clear if I understand 15 years

038is what we would expect this lasted 11 years. Um this was about 10 to 15 years depending on the type of chiller. This is the only >> No, I'm saying that this one is 11 years old. Correct. It was installed around 2015. All right. Okay. So, it didn't quite make the 15, but it's not gone yet either. Correct. >> It's going to be repaired. It's not bro- It's not We don't have to replace it. We just have to repair it. Yes. Okay. So, it's not It's not a complete loss of money. We're just repairing it. Okay. I will see you Mr. Medina's hand. Thank you. Can it be repaired? Each chiller has a has two compressors. So, chiller number two, one compressor is fully being replaced, and the second compressor is being repaired. They'll remove

039it, repair it, and bring it back. And Use your microphone. And those parts, so one of them is being replaced, and the other one is being repaired. That new one that's being replaced, is that one that that part has um warranty? I'm not sure. I can check on that, but usually anything new does come with a warranty. >> And who's paying this 66 thousand? The That's coming from capital. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Watson. And how when you when they repair rather than replace, how how long does a repair last? Um according to the vendor, he um he has already repaired one compressor in chiller one. That's why we currently um fortunately have one whole chiller running. The chiller can run with one compressor, just not at full load. So, we have two compressors

040on one chiller running now, and he repaired one of those a few weeks ago on a Saturday for us. Yeah, but but how how long once they repair it, how how long is it uh how long does it last after they repair it? >> think we we could actually tell. It's like your car if you repair a part in your car and and you use the car, it could go again. So So why are we So why aren't we just completely replacing it? We did put in a request into our capital plan this year to completely replace both chillers, but in the meantime, it's sort of an emergency due to the reasons I stated in the beginning. We have the new gym floor and airflow and comfort for those in the building. Mr. Nipple? Just

041Just Mr. Nipple, can you grab a microphone? I'd like to try to clarify. They're repairing the compressor or replacing the compressor. That's very minimal amount. To replace the whole chiller is 1.2 million. Okay. So people will understand. Replacing the whole chiller, and gutting it out complete, is 1.2 million. We did it at Batavia, well, the city funds through the capital budget, the city funds it. What happened in a lot of cases when these contractors when they put these chillers in, they undersized them. So the chiller will be running too much, and it burns it out. That's what happened with Batavia. But what George is doing now, any new construction, the contractor must deliver the capacity of the chiller that the architect has put in there. If contractors undersize it, cannot see their tail light once

042they leave, they might page, you know, my save $200,000 but they keep going. 10 years the chiller is over in March. But this is repair, not a complete replacement. Thank you. Mr. Benahan. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Mr. Woodson, were you all set? I'm sorry. Yeah, I was all set. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Unquo. Thank you. Mr. Benahan, sorry. Thank you. Um you said they cost $500,000, you know, half half a million dollars, right? Each chiller and there's two at Central. >> the guarantee of the early form for 1 year. The new chillers, yes. Yeah. Is there not a way um they can find a guarantee, you know, more years or is only exactly 1 year? They cannot be you know, more years, you know, the guarantee. I say 3, 5 years, something

043like that. Um for the new chillers, I'm not sure. When they come with construction, we do get a 1-year warranty with them. I can look into it for you to see if there are chillers out there with longer warranties, but usually when it's a new chiller, it's from new construction and that's And the purpose of this one is not new chillers, just replacement. >> Mhm. Repair, sorry. Replacement. Right. No, I was asking you, you know, because you talking about almost half a million dollars, you know, and have a guarantee for 1 year. I'm not okay with so much money unless you know, that's why. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Sokolovic. I am looking at the maintenance and repairs. Mr. Unquo, did you say cuz I'm saying I'm looking at the justification

044memo on the the repair. I'm not sure if there's two of them yet. I haven't seen the second one yet. Um it's saying it's a operating cost. Operation. And the repair the replacement >> uh online he said it's coming from operating not capital. And that's for both the replacement and the repair is going to both be operating income. We got we need a microphone. They can't hear you online. >> How much did you put out for both? 66,000. It's coming from operating. Thank you. They're not going to bond it. They're not going to bond $66,000 repair. >> We we have a we have a capital fund for building maintenance and repairs that What are you taking it from? Capital. It's it's on here as capital. On our online document it's on capital. >> Okay. I'm

045not It's not operating. On a justif- On a justification >> you're looking at that might be the one for the um quarterly maintenance for high-tech. It's quite possible. All right, let me see. Maybe you are correct. >> Yes. Thank you. It's called finding we got to use the way but chiller maintenance for smart chiller. Yeah, for maintenance we use operating. For the um replacement we're using capital. Thank you for the revision. Thank you. Um seeing no further hands, we have a motion and it's properly seconded. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? >> I. I. Any abstentions? All right, that passes. Are you Is that it for you? Okay, thank you. Um we're going to move on to the approval to enter into a joint contract with the city for the employee assistance

046program services. Dr. Siano? I um through chair, we had an opportunity to bid on an employee assistance program with the city of Bridgeport, so it covers all city employees and Board of Ed employees. It's a chance for some cost savings. You have the information in your um board packet. So, we would recommend that we partner with the city on this um important feature for our employees. Um so, they could uh get all kinds of support, not just mental health support, but other kinds of uh you know, service and support that they might be going through family issues or um they might need uh help with care for older parents, something like that that they could use the service. So, um it's a good partnership with the city and and we're, you know, excited to put

047this opportunity in front of you for for a vote. Mr. Calloway? Yeah. I didn't see your hand, but I just felt you. You needed to say something? Yeah, I'm trying to see where it is in here in the packet unless I'm actually seeing it, but I do have questions about why this is being proposed as a contract rather than an RFP to go out to bid for a firm as before we before we go out for the contract. We're going to do something with the city. We usually get it before us and there's issues that have traditionally come before us with dealing with the city because we got to make sure there's a proper apportionment of funds to pay for these things pay for these things and all that and I really Is is it

048in the packet? I didn't see it in Through the chair. So, we did go through the RFP process with the city. The city initiated it. Um we were using the same EAP service anyway for services, so the same company had been providing services for both the city and Board of Ed. So the city put it out to bid. We interviewed several bidders that submitted bids. And so we we did partner with the city through that RFP process. So we're already using them, we're just combining it, you're saying? Correct. Got it. You want to keep going? Uh no, give me Mr. Mr. Traynor. Okay, so following up on what Mr. Sikalovic I thought was going to go to, um the apportionment it just kept the same ratio or it would seem to me that gets adjusted

049depending on you. I believe in the packet the the cost per employee is for both Board of Ed and city employees. I don't think they broke out a a cost for Board of Ed versus I think it's just a per employee cost. So the proposed contract is straight up just a cost per employee and then we just took the number of employees in either unit. Correct. And we achieved cost savings by combining the employees for a larger employee number which brought the bid down versus bidding for Board of Ed employees and then separately for city employees. I got that. So use though didn't come into play cuz use has always come into play in medical I know in health insurance. You know, you know, that's always been so it doesn't come into play in a

050contract like this? For employee assistant programs it's a little different than health. So they they have up to a certain level of visits. So every employee has that level. It's not exactly based on the Forget that I was involved with the APs. So, I understand how that works. I'm just asking you this doesn't come into play on the cost side? No. Interesting. Mr. Medina. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um this document says dated forward. I believe this is part of your of this what we're speaking now. I I can't see which one you're referring >> Request request legal services. Is that part of your thing and it's got here title document employee assistant program EAP services contract. With a number of >> That's that's that part of That's the same. So, I just want to note

051on the second um if you want to call it a line here paragraph if you would the box it says uh date forwarded 5 19 2026 request a response date says 6 1 2026 or when available as all legal {slash} contracts must be reviewed before the BOE contracts committee. We don't have a contracts committee. That's why it's before the board. Correct. I think it's the committee of the whole. So, this is before the full board. Okay. I'm just reading this because I just confused you. >> Yeah, and we just changed our whole bylaws so the city probably hasn't caught up with our committees yet. Okay. I just thought this is a legal document so I thought it should be dated correctly but I'm not a problem. I just wanted to note that because I just

052caught my eye. Thank you. Mr. Nicole, did you have a uh Yeah. Just to clarify what Dr. Siena was saying, the the winning bidder Is it on? Yeah, I think it I think so. I think it's on. The winning bidder is based on the unit cost to charge per employee both on the city side and the Board of Education side. So, each side will pay the unit cost based on the number of the employees. So, Board of Ed will pay unit cost, the agreed upon unit cost based on the number of Board of Ed employees, and the city will pay the unit cost based on the number of employees. Historically, when we were using KGA, which is the old company, last 3 years, it was running or costing the district about $41,000 every year. That's

053when we are using KGA. But now we're going we're going we're switching over to Lexington, which is price is cheaper than KGA. So, you might get a slight discount. Plus, it's also a what they call cost containment. Um after 5 years of using KGA, Lexington unit cost is to will be cheaper than KGA. So, cost containment meaning over time, you're containing the the number by not going up so high with inflation with inflation cost of living increase. Thank you. Mr. Traynor. Yeah, I I I have this vague memory in the back of my head that the last time we did this, we had a comparative table. Remember that? Um couple 3 years ago, um we had a comparative table that showed us the three bidders and what they were offering, what the costs were, what

054the differences were. Yes, generally, um purchasing department already made that determination of all the bidders, and these are the This is the company that awarded the bid based on their competence and based on their unique cost. If you read the package, it says that they are purchasing or they scrutinized all the bids, all the bidders. So, they're already basically awarding it to Lexington. If you read the summary, it tells you every good thing about Lexington versus KGA, which was doing it before. This one-page summary is there. Yeah, I I I see the summary. I just don't know why we weren't sort of against the last I I'm just wondering why it's not why it's been changed. But They're using the same company. They're just combining the city and the board side. I think that's No,

055we were given three >> a different company. The previous company we were we had separate contract. summarized in a Okay. in a one-page sheet showing us their costs, what services they were offering, what you know, and we're given a summary of the bids uh and what was being recommended and why. And we voted to approve it. But Did you have a Mr. Second. Mr. Medina. Thank you, Madam Chair. Does anybody have Mr. Nucor or the Dutch CI like an estimate of what the savings we're looking at possibly by joining this and doing this that way people can maybe understand. Generally, the previous contract was around $3 per employee. So, what's the savings? You're saying generally was $3? minus um I don't know >> So, now it's a it's a dollar 14 now. Okay, thank you.

056That's where we fall. So we fall between the 500 and 1,000 employee mark. Correct. >> Thank you. That does it. Thank you. Mr. Willis, I'm ready. Yeah, so Am I going so Yep. You're on. Do you want to go or Yes. So my question is around the insurance policy that we already have with the state and does this by incorporating an EAP, does that help us or lower that premium any? I believe the state partnership plan is separate from employee assistance programs. Okay. Thank you. So I I'm just sort of rounding out Mr. Medina's question. What is the savings then? Uh you gave us a per employee savings. What does that add up to total? You know, um I don't have that figure right now, but it's you know, we were paying $3 roughly per

057employee. Now it's about $1.14. I heard that and wrote it down. It means nothing to me. It's the total that's relevant. It a dollar what? A dollar what? A dollar It's a dollar I don't know how many employees we're paying for. A dollar A dollar what? Hm? Mr. Willis got that number for you. It really doesn't matter. Just multiply it by 10. Now you're using a microphone. >> [laughter] >> They're getting that number. >> Do it a different way where you could say it's over 50%. That doesn't tell me either. It's over 60% fact. Mhm. I don't believe you can put it that I don't know. I know. You just let it go. Um That's because it makes any It's It's It's very important. Yeah. We can get the We can get that figure for

058you from the city. Okay, let me do it this way. Can somebody give me a ballpark how many employees were paying for? >> Let me try this one. Again, in the last 3 years we paid 41,000 the district paid 41,000 every year. Okay. If the cost is going from $3 to $1.14, that's a 62% discount. I said 60. 62% discount times 41,000 that we paid you saving $25,000. Mhm. $25,000 reduction in what you we were paying. Which is why I made the statement is somewhat of a more of a cost reduction and cost containment. I used those words earlier. Any further questions? Is there a motion? You haven't made a motion already. Who made the motion? Um About 13,000 employees. >> make a second. Yeah, you're right. I'll find it. No. You said 40 You

059said we pay >> 4,700. I divided 40,000 by 30. Well, I'm not >> We were paying We were paying a dollar a dollar. Now, we're going to be paying a dollar 14 cents. Okay. I'm not going to beat this dead horse, but >> No, I mean you see It is It is basic >> reduction in cost. I I get it. I figured that out already, Nestor. I'm just curious what the total was. So, I'm going to let it go because I want to go home like everybody else. But, it is a basic fact of easy enough to know how many employees we have that we're paying on. That's all. Mr. Medina. Thank you for that. Mr. Trailor, I just want to add to my question before. I thought that we fell as a agency under

060company under the 501 to 1,000 being fourth the dollar 14. If we're looking at it over 1,000 plus employees the agency, why we are not at 106 and or 124? Okay, in the graph I I think the thing is maybe there's no page number the second or third page amendment number three it talks about where we are as a agency and it'll go and gives a monthly with a dollar number which I confirmed with him the dollar 14 came from this the cost of three 60-minute in-person counseling session of each employee per issue each each year. That's at three and then the other box is at six at 60-minute and you have rates there. Um he used a 114, so I asked when he stated that if that's where we fall as an agency. But

061if we're looking at a higher number as an agency, why we're not at the 106 for the three 60-minute and then at the six the 124. Or are we at just a flat 114? I'm just reading the document in front of me. Yep. I do. I'm scrolling through to the I think it's in the appendix. Um B is the >> with all due respect, I just found another piece of paper cuz there's a whole bunch of them. With all due respect, I see here from the Lexington Group um employee assistant program rate and services summary for the city of Bridgeport, they were at 4,200 employees, three session assessment and referral model will be at 106. The six, like I stated, is at 124 and an eight session assessment referral was at 175. So are things

062getting better for worse for them and better for us? I don't understand that. And I'll show you this document, Mr. President. >> you're on the you're on the correct column in appendix B. It's page one of appendix B. That's the price schedule for Lexington. So you're correct. We're at the the cost goes up based on the amount of sessions you offer an employee. So if you're offering the employee the six session, it's more expensive and then the eight session is more expensive than that. That's why they give you >> Yeah, I agree, but we still I'm still stuck at that dollar 14 you had mentioned earlier. Doesn't coincide with the number employees we have. And when you made that statement of the 114, I asked, do we fall under that category of the agency with

063500 plus 1,000 plus? And then now as I continue to look at people work here, um the elected group one that is here labeled under the city of Bridgeport 4,200 employees three sessions 1.06, six sessions referral 1.24, and the eight sessions at 1.75. You mentioned 1.14. So, I'm just going to I'm trying to get clarity. Where are we? Is it a 1.14 to 1.06 uh category of over 4,000-plus employees? You're correct. It's the row with agency with 1,000 or one more employees. Okay. Thank you. Through the chair. Thank you very much. Can somebody confirm for me, um either John or Rizza, if there's been a motion for this item? Did you move this or the previous item? I I do not have a motion for this item. That was the previous item you moved. So,

064is there a motion for this item? I can make the motion. Mr. Chair, we made the motion. So, if you could second it, we can move on. Second. Um any further debate? All in favor. Say I. I. Any opposed? Let's do a roll call cuz I'm not getting any What was the next one? I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Um Mr. Bettencourt Hallis. I. Ms. Burke-Jennings. I. Okay. Mr. Daniels. Um I vote yes. Mr. Medina? I'm going to abstain. Okay. Um Ms. Perez? Yes. Mr. Sakalovic? I will abstain. Okay. Mr. Traynor? Yes. Okay, so he voted yes. Okay. And Mr. Woodson? Yes. Okay, motion carries. >> Mr. Benavente has to vote. He passed earlier. Oh, he did. I keep doing that. I'm sorry. Mr. Benavente Ramos? It's okay. Um yes. Okay, excellent. Motion carries. Thank you. Um

065thank you, Dr. Zeno. Now we'll get into um discussion and possible approval of an amendment to the bylaw 9132 / 9133 to include board members to speak as a right at a committee meeting. Mr. Sakalovic? Yeah, this maybe a bit of um us keeping it moving along a little quicker. It's our parliamentary procedures procedures. Um that was tabled at the last meeting and we didn't carry it through for immediate acceptance. So, therefore, I would like to add to the agenda bypassing policy 9300 to immediately to bypass the first and second read for immediate approval of What's the number? Policies 9132 and 9133. Second. Motion was made by Mr. Sakalovic and seconded seconded by Mr. Medina to bypass 91 93 what is it 9310? 9132 and 9133. >> No. No. So motion to All of the

066policy 9300. 9300. Um to for MBD implementation. Um so is there any further debate on that? I'm leaving the policy so we get uh the I forgot your name really quickly. Mr. Nastasi. Like Dr. something. No, it's Mr. Nastasi. I'm so sorry. No, he's has a question he has something to say speak to. Go ahead. Yeah uh There it goes. Right. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um I have a question. Um is this the policy that I drafted that talks about allowing non-committee members to speak after committee members have spoken? Yes. Okay. Assuming it is then I may have to um correct that because I submitted that predicated on an outdated rule of the City Council which for better or worse apparently was invalidated by a ruling of the Freedom of Information Commission. Although I have

067not seen it yet, they have not sent it to me yet. Allegedly it exists whereby virtue of letting non-committee members speak there was a ruling of the Commission although it may not have been appealed. So I want to see it that said now every member of the public gets to speak as well because since they're not committee members they have no greater standing than members of the public. What the city council did in response to that, in order to sort of negate the result of that decision, was to adopt new language, which now exists, and I'll read it to you quickly. What the new language in city council um rule 12, council committees, the pertinent part is "All council members not named to a specific committee shall be non-voting ex-officio members of any standing committee,

068but shall not be counted for purposes of determining a quorum of such committee." So, essentially, they made every council member a member of every committee. Now, that doesn't necessarily solve your problem of the order of speaking, but presumably, it would make If you wanted to go that route, I don't know whether you do or not, but if you wanted open up committee meetings to all board members to speak, I would suggest the more prudent approach right now would be to make all non-committee members ex-officio non-voting committee members, and then the chair would presumably recognize the voting members first and then the non-voting members. So, that's just a I'm I'm basically correcting what I gave to you, and I apologize for the late notice. Before we speak to this, there is a motion right now to

069waive our policy to make this an immediate implementation. So, before we you're going to withdraw your vote? Okay. I'll would the motion. Yeah, motion, sorry. So, the motion's been withdrawn. Um Mr. Traber. I think my question was just answered um by Attorney Anastasi, which was the question of order is moot because the chair controls the speakers and the chair can call on the speakers on the committee before the chair chooses call on speakers who are not on the committee. And we can establish a sort of unwritten rule that the chair will call on committee members first without without any harm being done. I think that that erred to solve the problem, um which begs the question of do you want to table this and have me rewrite it and do it at the next meeting

070so that you actually have the final language in front of you since I'm sort of changing uh what I previously submitted, for which I I've already apologized. I would prefer that. I would move to table for the next meeting so that he can rewrite it properly. I I would like to write the table Mr. I'll second you, but Second Mr. Benitez. Second Mr. Benitez. Well, the second one was withdrawn in the middle of the the question of order. I this is just for um go forward purposes. >> This we did have similar language drafted and presented before committee and it was deferred to the city attorney's office. However, we had additional language in there protecting us from actually make ensuring that there's no confusion that the ex-officio members are not counted towards a quorum for

071meeting purposes as well. >> Mr. Anastasi, If you already have that language available, you can amend it by substitution here. Um I haven't submitted something specific to the board. I did read you the language from the uh city council. >> draft was given to you yet, and then by the next meeting can we get your opinion on it or you know, your recommended language? Um Is that like if we table it today and we get you the language that Mrs. Kalabic drafted? Well I think it was you created it. Yes. Yeah. Oh, that would be fine. Again, I didn't sense any tremendous urgency on this, but you do want to have a long-term appropriate solution. Yeah. So yeah, we can we'll get that to you this week so that way two weeks we can come

072back for it. Thank you. >> But the motion has been made to table the item for the next board meeting and seconded by Mr. Benehan. Um seeing no other hands on that, all in favor say I. I. I. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? That passes. So we're going to table that item. Um, oh, all right, here we go. Last item. Second read and approval of the revised policy series 3000 business/non-instructional operations for immediate implementation. Now, we met um this came through the policy committee two weeks ago and last week we met as a full board online, I believe. Um to uh do the first read. So this is the second read. Um and part of that was there were some clarifications that we needed from uh the board uh the executive cabinet on um some

073of the language around the operations um and direct deposit um and some other outdated language. So uh I know those were some of the main concerns that we had uh before the second read. So seeing we have questions here, Mr. Mccallubic. >> Yes, ma'am. Quite quite quite a couple because the second read that's before us is not the same thing that was taken out of committee. That's not what we voted for in the first read. Um there was a change made and especially and most importantly is 31 policy 3160 has been reduced from five categories. There was conduction There was conversation about this being five or six categories. It is now sitting at four categories and this change has not been brought before us at all and it's just sitting there. If you approve it

074without reading it as a second read, it's approved. I would like to hear from the CFO what he thinks about this change going to four categories from five because I think that would be actually in opposition of what we're doing with um the same with the city with the city's accounting. Just clarify the >> No, no, the blue blue is uh what we've approved, right, Daniel? See, no. Um Mike. Mike. Mike, please. Hold on. On the mic. The The highlighted sections are the ones that were revised from the committee. Thank you. But I don't 3160, we did not revise that to four committees to four categories at committee level. When we referred it to Mr. Nicole working with public works and the city departments, that that's what the changes that were supposed were proposed. So,

075if Mr. Nicole wants to explain So, that's my point because we haven't approved it. Nicole. >> It's It's on the Mr. Nicole, but you can use the microphone. Good. Wherever you want to sit. Okay, good evening everyone. Um when you look at Cave report, what they gave, they gave six or seven categories which their string of object code when you what you call object code is a count strings. It's totally different from the city's object code. They're using 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, 5,000, 7,000. Bridgeport uses 5,000. If you look at what I had attached, a budget that I had attached earmarked 5,100 is cut in a section called salaries. 5,000 111 is in a section called other personnel. So, if you look at it, the grouping 1 2 Grouping number one is 01 is personnel services

076which is strictly full-time salary and part-time employees. Grouping number two which is other personnel services, yeah, regular overtime, normal longevity, time and half, unused sick day, personal day, travel. Those are wages for an employee also, but that taxable wages just like salaries have been taxed. The difference between two of them, let me clarify it here. My honest opinion, category one section one which is 01 which is personnel services which is strictly salaries and see um part-time employees. Department or the finance director or the superintendent should not be allowed to make a categorical transfer from salaries to overtime or back and forth. The reason why I'm saying that if a department has a part has a position that has not been filled for six months, if they transfer money from salary savings for those six months

077into overtime, they permanently increase that overtime line item going forward. Because the budget will change the budget number for that overtime line item will change. Next year they will come back to whoever the CFO and say, "I was budgeted for two sanitarians or two custodians." "Give me my two custodians." Meanwhile, they already increased their overtime budget going forward. Now you're going to give them another full-time custodian. Automatically, they increased budget on the other side without anybody knowing. That's the danger. I mean, I've done it on the I know that's why the way I handle on the city side. You cannot transfer from one category to another because you're permanently increasing that category budget number and come back and say, "Oh, I had two custodians." "Give me my two custodians." Yes, but you took 6 months

078of that custodian savings while it was vacant and increased overtime category. That is the danger there that I wouldn't recommend the board to uh go ahead. I get that. Um I think Mr. Tokovic's question is more so that um the items were changed on the document, so it reduced it from six categories to four. You could make it five, which means 01 is personnel services. 02 is other 02 is other personnel services. 03 is fringes. 04 is operating expenses. 05 is special services. Cuz that's the way the budget is grouped now. That's why that's how the city the city is lined up as well. That's the way Board of That's the way Board of That's the way Board of Education is equally lined up, not [clears throat] just the city. >> And that would fit

079right into us using utilizing the city's uh accounting accountability rather than having So So it runs parallel with the city's accounting structure. There's no need to reinvent the wheel. You just follow the guidelines and the rules. You don't go between categories. To go between categories I, the CFO or the superintendent, have to come before the board. That's the way it's handled. And can you clarify the five categories? The five categories are Look at the the bold letters. 01 is personal services. And what you have in is full-time salary paid. >> We're looking at something different. Yeah, I know. Sorry, we're looking at something different. You're looking at >> We're What are you looking at? It's the budget document. It's included in the packet. >> Okay, got you. It's 01 is personal services, which is limited

080to full-time salary, part-time employees, and seasonal employees. That's where it limits. Oh, okay. Sorry, the groupings my just pointed the groupings go up, not down. >> So where you see 02 other personnel the grouping goes up, which inclusive of over straight overtime, regular overtime, holiday overtime, time and half overtime, three times overtime, longevity. That category is still pensionable. So it's part of That's why it's called other personnel services. It falls in the same line, taxable taxable category with salaries. Then you come to fringe benefits, which is basically life insurance, health insurance, worker's comp, you know, those are not taxable. If they're not taxable earnings, they're not part of earnings. Then you have operating expenses. You can transfer between operating expenses. The reason why operating expenses is so big when you're transferring between water and sewer,

081you can do that if there's a pipe leak. They're not going to you know, when there's a pipe burst, then I have to come to the board and say, "Oh, we don't have money." You just move the money because you don't know you might have a good weather. You save on gas, you save on natural gas, you save on oil. So, you have time to figure yourself out during the year. That's why that category is kind of flexible. Then you go to the last category, which is category five, which is special services. This is where you contract out to contractors or companies. You cannot transfer from that category to another category. You're limited to what you're committed to there. So, my recommendation is stick to those five categories and don't allow intercategory intersectional transfer. Mr.

082Chair, Mr. Cobb has a question, sir. But That's the policy language that we're which is that state which you just basically went through. >> Right. So, I kind of explained that it I'm going to take um the same line that Mark used. I apologize. I tried consolidating going by what K is saying or the way K has it. K has salaries and fringe and the other personnel as one. I don't think it's prudent anything to do, if you ask me. But again, it's up to the board. Mhm. Management-wise, for your better control, limited to salaries, limited to personnel services. So, we can change the one through five to match >> the city codes that >> Right. Mr. [clears throat] Nicole is just going through. >> Yeah. Mhm. Giving the board more control. If you ask

083>> want to um remind the board that you are going to see some changes on here that weren't discussed at committee because we sent it back to the the the cabinet to make those changes that we asked. So, and some of these uh things were sent back for revisement to bring before of us. Right. And for a point of clarification, I did ask that these be highlighted for us what was changed so we could actually look at that. So, it's not approved over And that's why they highlighted it. >> did. So, now as always one of them I suppose. So, Mr. Are you done with that one? Yes. Can you put your background phone on? But no, no, I think he has to put his phone on. The point of information is I thought we

084were going to see it though. And and that doesn't show me it. I I get that I'm looking at this explanation that Mr. McCloud was just giving us. But I don't see the draft there. In my packet and I'm I'm looking at that document there. Danielle. This is where I gave you your packet for the day and I had a meeting with Mr. McCloud later in the So, this is the updated the most updated I've done. So, I I don't I don't have I don't have it in here at all. That's That's what you're saying. She said that she updated it. I'm looking online right here on my laptop. And that's what's up there. Yeah. And it's not there either. What's not What's missing? What are you saying that's missing? The categories aren't listed there.

085The categories that we just went through that Mr. McCloud just explained. Where's the Where's the incentive incentive plan and I didn't 5,000 5,100 etc. etc. etc. So, that's what it's going to say is salary 51 XXX. Because you have many object code there. And then it's going to say benefits. It's going to say benefits. Because I'm using the very 5100 5200. Once you go to 5200, it becomes fringe benefits. So any number with fringe benefit any number with 5200 is fringe benefits, which falls in that category of fringe benefit. Any number with 5300 to 5500 falls under operational expense. So we're using the word XXX because you might have a department that has 25 different object code. >> Okay. So now and we're not going to have a five or six. You're going to have

086>> to have four. You're going to have 55 Okay. You're going to have 55 53 to 55 then 6000 to The 30 My district stops at 5600 to 5900. It stops from It stops from 5600 56,000 to 5900. Which is the five categories. But not Board of Ed Information Technology. Where is Board of Ed Information Technology? Which line? The eight. Which one? You have X'd it out. Um let me see which one here. Your financial Would have been two. Right? Not the one screen. On the screen? Wait a >> Right after 5600 5900. Property improvement, you're saying? Oh. The 5900 I actually have because it's just a department that kind of talks about principal and interest, which is not really Board of Education expense. Board of Ed doesn't going to principal and interest. Am I

087looking at what you're looking at? Yeah. Page 529? Yeah. Okay. >> 521. Okay. And after 5900 521 Board of Ed Information Technology Service Yeah, let me see why. Okay. The reason why I exit out, if you look at the org, what they call org You have two orgs there. The very first org is 01872000, which is a different department. You have stockroom, which is 01873000. Then you have information technology, which is 01874000. It's because because it doesn't have enough object codes, there's no point showing it. It only has two two sectional categories, information technology. So, a more practical department to use is nutrition center, which have all the five categories that you're going to be adopting. sample org It's just a sample. Yeah. This is the way This is the budget I got it. This

088is nutrition center. I understand. This is Board of Ed budget book from the budget book online. I understand your point. You're just offering us a sample. A more that's much more fully expanded. >> I understand. A nutrition center is more ideal department for me to use because it has tons of object codes. >> DJ's department's not a good example. Yes. >> [laughter] >> That's why I crossed them. That's why I exit them out. Oh. All right. That's not good. Uh Mr. Medina. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um just to work with my colleagues here, my brothers and sisters here. So, there's five. There's five categories. >> salary Yep. If I may. Mhm. salary Mhm. benefits, operation expenses Purchase, professional. Techno services / supplies and materials. And special services. Yep. That's the five. Those are the five.

089When you say these words. And please bear with me. You say you can't move. You have a question on that one Mr. Traynor? I just want to give you time. I thought that was cool. Okay, ready? That's fine. Salary. >> Fine. One. Benefits. Two. Operation expenses. Three. Purchase I'm sorry. Purchase, professionals, technical services, supplies and materials, four. Special services, five. Because I'm expanding it. Are you with me? Just want to make sure. Expanding it. Equal. Okay. So, when you had noted. On your Daniel, can you put the the other one if you wouldn't mind? This one up for me. You you keep on using the word category, respectfully. So, I'm going to work with you. You keep on saying category. And this is where we're talking about if funds are transferred. >> Yes, with micro

090Say with your microphone. Say with your microphone. I just wanted to point that we think. Yeah, you're good right there. Either right here is good. So, benefits is on top right now. So, if he needs. Okay, you're good right there. Let me know when you're done. Thank you. Now, salaries is on top. Yep. So, that's 5100. Right, but you have 251 you have 5100 that kind of interrelate. You see where it says 01. Personnel services, that's where that's the part of line for salaries. Then the 02 is other personnel services. >> Yeah, that's 52 over here. 52. No, no, no. You got to go up. You read it up. You read it up. >> Oh, you read it up? Okay. What I wanted to ask is about categories. You used the word category. Sectional categories.

091Object object code sectional special categories. >> So, that means from this benefit section here, he can't move money. He won't be able to move money from this section to let's say up to salaries or our permission. I don't recommend it. >> Exactly. That's why I'm just trying to make sure that when you say category, that's where you sign Sectional sectional category. >> benefits, if he's here in this line of workers compensation feel whatever there's money there, he can move it down to social security. That is that's within a category. That is correct. I'm wondering if very much. Like I started saying earlier, what I had presented earlier because I was trying to follow cave pattern the way they categorize it. I don't think it's for me, I don't recommend it to the board. I'd rather

092have five categories. That's what I'm trying to say. It gives the board more control. And that's what I'm used to. And it makes logical sense. And I tried to explain it to you why. Somebody transferring money from salaries to overtime, burn the overtime, come back next year and say I have three custodians, you have to give me my three custodian. Meanwhile, with their transfer, they've increased their budget on overtime next year. And they can do it every year, you know. By the time overtime of 50,000 will end up to be 200,000 three four years down the road. I'm telling you the games I've seen people try to play. Well, but it's it's not it's it's going to be insignificant. They can't even tell. >> Yeah, just to clarify. Yeah, just to clarify. At the committee

093at not the committee level, at the last board meeting it was five categories that we discussed. There was discussion of six categories. Mr. Well, even shrinking the categories, Mr. Quo emphasized as the CFO of Bridgeport Public Schools, a large city that we basically need this. In his professional opinion, working in a big city rather than cave blanket policies for 169 districts, many small, very different districts, that we need this policy direct for Bridgeport because it will serve Bridgeport Public Schools the best, and he's worked on both the city side and our side. So, he knows what these object codes are. He'll be able to read it, and any financial officer coming from the city side or any basically a lot of other big cities will be following the same policy. So, it will give everybody

094an apples-to-apples comparison going forward, and it does increase our oversight, which is always better. I mean, if we wanted to be more lax, that would be problematic, and it would cause red flags, but even even if this was a state-side suggestion for us to take more responsibility, only more control, it would seem be seen as a positive overall, and not a negative. So, I suggest we listen to the professional recommendations of Mr. Quo, and have the five categories put back as he stated. Mr. Traber. All that notwithstanding, I only see four objects up there. So, we're trying to put back the Pardon me? That's what we're trying to put back and correct, right Mr. That's the Okay, so that's what I'm trying to understand. Are we going to put a five a fifth object in

095there? Yes, we're going to put five sectional categories, just the way it is in the budget book. I was trying to appease or please, going by what K the way he structured it, which was salaries and benefits combined as one. To me, I just told you the reason why somebody can abuse this system. The The Mr. Medina read it, we're going to put a fifth object in there. We're going to have object five five sectional categories. Five sectional categories. Yep. I don't want to use I don't want to use too much accounting term. It's actually called sectional object code categories, but I don't want to confuse anymore everyone. I got a question for them. May I ask attorney a parliamentary question? Sure. We had this uh for a second read. The new language was not

096included. I mean the old language that we're trying to put back was in the first read. So, can we just make a motion to approve it as the first read or do we make a motion to add it back to what they changed from the first read? Understand my question? Uh All right. So, The first read Go ahead. Say one more time. I believe I believe the first read we removed our six We went to five categories. Correct? That's correct. Five categories. And the the same five categories Mr. Woods Yep. speaking to now. Mhm. And that's how it stood before the amendments on the paper that are before us. So, if we approve it as read in the first read rather than this is which is as we've never amend we've never amended it to

097have this language the four four or six or whatever have you. Currently changed in the first read as five categories as expressed by um Mr. Woods. You got that microphone, I think. Getting it on to it. In the first read it was amended. To five. Okay. And now tonight you're reverting back to the first read. Essentially. Mhm. Yeah, just just just sticking with the first read because these these are the first time we're seeing any of these changes basically. And I don't see a problem with that. No. And I've through the manager, I've given the board a sample where everyone to see those sectional object code categories. So it's right there. Again, I apologize. I was trying the first time around I saw it. Actually, I was taken unaware at the last board meeting. I

098started seeing cave and blending or mixing salaries and fringes which I don't agree with, but I just gave try to comply with it, but it it wasn't going too well with me. So uh This is the right way to do it. To Yeah. Yeah, I think I think that's all we got on this one and we're pretty clear. Um This is uh back to Cena. Um Yeah, not sorry. Um Butch yeah, probably good. I apologize for butchering your name all the time. It's Not a perfect. Um Yeah, any other highlighted change? I seem to remember one thing that we were supposed to be looking at for legal language. I can't recall exactly >> The affirmative action. We changed those. Those those were changed. And are there any other like languages that we were looking at

099to um I think it was something with safety we were looking at. >> Something with the facilities. Oh, through the chair. It was the the language about the paper direct you know, that that you could pick up your paper paychecks. So we we made that um more updated. And then the um um Is it inventories? That's um I'm looking for it now. Stock cards, stock record cards on the inventories. >> And the and yeah, correct. In the stock card for the books. That was 3440. For the books and materials, yeah. Up Yeah, I'm looking at supplies in warehouse. >> Yeah, the gender-neutral language. The 3440 um removed stock record cards. Inventories. Okay. Which one you want me to Huh? Which one? Just just just uh just whatever it was. And just whatever it was in

100Um so Okay. Connect. The one the one y'all were just speaking to. Uh 3440. 40. And where we just removed stock record cards cuz um that was outdated. There was language about business administrator that was changed to CFO in a different policy. Um I was just looking at that. I was just thinking I was just thinking like more material more material changes that we were discussing like that. I think there was something with the safety and confidentiality that we were looking at as well. I know what you're are talking about. Um So The safety plan at the board meeting that that sentence there on the goal. That's what we added based on the last six meeting. Yeah, I think that's it. I also I see that the um student appeal was added and it's still

101there. >> Yeah, we added that the Those those are the major ones. Anything else would be probably minor troubled with so That's all I have. If I go back to uh teams, I don't see any other hands. Up, there we go. Maritza Estremera Venegas. I um Dang, it don't Am I going again? I I hear you. We hear you. Okay. I have a number of edits um or really just questions. So and I will say um I did finish reading through this so some of it is just asking for clarifying questions. Um So nothing major. So for policy 3425 um it's referencing internal audits. And I was curious to know if we wanted a reference that annual audits that we regularly do as part of our budgeting in here. Um it just seemed like a

102lost opportunity for me. I think I think it's somewhere else, but I can't tell you for sure. Um Through the chair. Go ahead, Dr. I think it's the reference to the 9000 policies that you adopted about the audits that you would agree to, you know, annual audit? I think it's a 9,000 series. >> drafted it. It sounds familiar. Got you. I believe you're right, Dr. Young. Yeah, I just didn't know if we wanted to re-reference it in here. You footnote it? Yeah, Mr. Mr. Warrior, might I give a little input on this one? It's just on the top of my mind. Thank you. Um We have the discretion of the chief financial officer or for probably dating some language or at the direction of the board. From what I'm clear, Dr. Young. what they're referring

103to what they're referring to in this audit is strictly for student activity funds. Okay, got you. That's what they're referring to. >> Got you. Got you. Student activity funds, which is either the CFO or the the superintendent feeling that there is something He doesn't really He doesn't have to feel anything, actually. He can actually ask the city auditors, the city employee auditors, to go and audit student activity funds. So, it has nothing to do with the annual audit. Got you. The annual independent audit that the city has to conduct. What it means is that they can ask the finance department or controller's office, which is on the city side, to send their internal auditor to every school and act basically do spot check on their student activity fund, make sure that they're actually giving parents

104receipts, that the money is really secure, that somebody is really keeping Somebody is not leaving a thousand dollars in the drawer, which is not a good practice. So, money should have to be deposited on a regular basis and not have petty cash. That's what this is referring to. Understood. Okay. So, my next question is for policy 3430. Um actually, this is not so much of a question as it is the third bullet to strike out the last sentence of that third paragraph. Cuz it it's really about smaller towns and we don't have a board of selectmen. So, that that last component there from legislative instead of towns legislative body, it should say city and then get rid of everything else. Um So, it would be removing after or or in a municipality in which the

105legislative body is a town meeting to the board of selectmen. Did Did you want me to make like an official motion? Um Second. The motion was made, yeah. Uh go ahead, make a motion to amend it. Which one's? Um motion to strike out language related to municipalities small municipalities and the board of selectmen in um policy 3430. Okay. Uh motion was made by Ms. Esther Ramirez. Seconded by Mr. Traver. And um Okay. Any discussion? Uh we'll do a voice vote. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Sounds like the I's have it. So, that's been amended. Anything else? Yeah. I'm just I put little tabs so I can find them quicker. So, in policy 3516D, it sounds like this is related to safety that we're going to be getting the results

106of safety safety items. And I just wanted to clarify that the board itself will not get access to that stuff because of confidentiality and all of that that we discussed last week. Um and wanted to clarify that that should be going to the superintendent's office and his staff. Oh, uh 3516D. If you scroll down some more. Yeah. Yep. Through the chair, are you referring to the the policy evaluation paragraph? Yes. Yep. So, it almost seems like the board would be doing that, but that that doesn't seem accurate based on prior discussions. Is it state statute? Uh Um I believe it may be embedded in state statute that the board has to receive an annual report. It's got to be compiled, if I'm not mistaken. I'm not 100% but it feels state statute. Yeah, through the

107chair we can add the sentence that we added on the previous page to that paragraph. About the confidentiality statement. Evaluation. I'm apologize. Which policy? It's 3516D. So, we would just add the confidentiality statement after the statement that um Yeah, we would just add that. Okay. So, that the evaluation that the superintendent gives the board will be confidential. Yeah, that's okay. Excellent. All right. Um Moving right along, policy Let's make an amendment on that. Uh motion to amend. Okay, let me >> Mr. Traynor made the motion. I'll second. Okay. Um I just want to make my phone so they can hear. Um but we got we got to I move to amend 3516D as rewritten. Um All All in favor second with Mr. Ester Mar Hernandez. All in favor for that amendment say I. I. >>

108I. I. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All righty. Thank you. I'll go ahead and do the next one. R3517. This is a question around the building checks and I wasn't sure if we wanted to explain how often building checks should be taking place. 35:17 under the heading building checks. Can you say your question again? Yeah, should we be adding how often the they should be happening? Through the chair, I I think the the first sentence states they should be made on Saturdays, Sundays, and at such other times as necessary by the superintendent's designee. Um, are you proposing to clarify at other such times? No. So, it should we be specifying like, "Hey, all our buildings should be getting checked on a minimum quarterly, something like that." I Is this a day a weekly thing for

109every every building? Is that maybe the question? I'm not sure if that's the question. Uh, Mr. Trevor. I think the answer to that, Ms. Esther Mary Hemmenway, is no. I think it's left to the discretion of the superintendent and the director of operations. The different buildings are going to need different amount of checking and and and problem problems. So, a given building may need checking more often for a particular problem, and I think that's all going to be left to the professionals. Okay. I'm going to ask a question that might be a little controversial. Um, facilities master plan, do we want to add in here that it needs to be done X amount of years every X amount of years. It it I'm hesitant because of the cost. My my opinion would be yes, but

110we can't afford it. Last time we waited 15 years before we did the next one. So, I think that's really a It's a frivolous It would seem to me that it it's a It would be it would be something that doesn't mean anything. Got you. It would be almost like unenforceable unless yeah. Right. Is that a is that a separate evaluating policy or you're trying to add it to to this one? Well, I just want to to make sure that we're consistently checking our our buildings. Like if there's something that needs to be repaired, obviously we have maintenance in every building, but I wasn't sure if we as a board wanted to have something more concrete. Like hey, every so often this should be getting checked. All right, thank you. Yeah, well, I I'll concur

111with Mr. Chairman. If it was an existing policy, I would have just suggested adding subject to funding availability, but since it's not an existing policy, I don't think we need to go there. Thank you. Right. Okay. So, I think we can go ahead and move on. All right. Hold on, Mr. Medina. Through through the chair and Ms. Morris, I just want to speak on this same point that you're making about building checks if I may. Mhm. Go for it. Thank you. Because it says that the building checks are to be made on Saturdays and Sundays. Again, through the superintendent's designee, but then it says that the building checks is to be a accomplished by the head custodian. So, it states who it is. Is it the superintendent Destiny? And also, I just want to question

112through my colleagues if these such checks are being done, are they being reported back to us or who they be reported to? Brickets, okay. No. Well, not to I mean, I think we get updates throughout the year with them facilities. So, I think that that all would be included in the updates. So, can we make that happen? Make sure this is stated specifically that we would like to get some of these updates. I want to make that specific if it is not already. That'll be a great idea just to make sure. Well, >> want to take anything for granted. I think that's um If this year's brings uh kind of like uh recollection of many students coming over here speaking about the bathroom conditions and things like that, XYC. So, if there's no running water

113at the sink or whatever, sinks that are broken, then this thing should have been, you know, catching it, let's say. But, I don't think this >> I think we get like um like in the updates from facilities throughout the like um the year. That would be brought up during that time. I'm trying to I'm trying to look and talk at the same time at our assistant policies. Sorry. >> No, we can Um Work it in later. And if I I don't know. Do we want to get reported on every bathroom leak or is that No, I don't think we need to know. Cuz I cuz I know we get the reports during the committees and then you know, uh um in the the past few years, we've had reports almost annually on the different items

114that have been brought up that need like either capital improvements or just um you know, items that need to be did it you could need to be replaced or whatever. Um I know I know I know both Mr. Garcia are both looking right now at the same at the for the I feel like >> fact of the matter because but I did my my school business a few times through all the years and like that you know some playgrounds were being spoken about some areas and if this stuff was happening they would have seen that stuff last year the year before that the year before that because this stuff has been you know let's say a playground in particular has been deteriorating over 3 4 years but if this was happening I think that would

115have been brought up before the condition and the safety condition so that's why I just I know Mr. I know Mr. Garcia and operations are not here right now but there is some kind of system in place if I'm not mistaken where you know if there's a some kind of like ticket system where like if there is a uh fact uh like some matter or something that's put a ticket in and they'll fix it or am I am I making myself like in that sense like where if there is a pipe burst there's a ticket that gets put in Mhm. and so Yeah it's through through the chair we do have an internal reporting system like that through the chief of but it's just I think the debate is how much the board wants to

116be notified about. I do want everything that be in a in a regular report so we can we can check on that with Mr. Garcia. Mr. Saldivar Can we pull up 3510 please Ms. Koshal? I believe that should be embodied. I see uh operation and maintenance I knew I saw something like that. So where does it say quarterly report somewhere? Yeah summary on October 1st. second paragraph Mhm. And through the chair, we can ensure that the comprehensive maintenance plan includes items that the board wants to be included in that report, so we can work with Mr. Garcia on that. All right. Did that Did that answer it? Okay, perfect. Thank you. All right. Uh Mrs. Mary Ann Mass. Yeah, so policy 3520.11A the second paragraph references the school system and throughout this entire document, we

117never refer to the school system, so I'm proposing that we refer to this to either the Bridgeport Board of Education or Bridgeport Public Schools. Um Danielle, you're highlighting something here. Is that where you are, the Bridgeport Public Schools? The second paragraph says school system. So, we can just say the Bridgeport Public School System. Yeah. Okay, that that's Should I make the formal motion for this? Yeah. Okay. Through the chair. Go ahead, Dr. Sue. >> I believe So, if you look at the third sentence in the first paragraph, I think it should say Bridgeport Public Schools system because I think it's it's the actual information system that will ensure appropriate access to people. So, it's I don't think it means the school system. I think it means the the uh uh Or the system itself. >>

118IT. Yeah, IT system. So, that makes sense. Yeah, actually. So, instead of the schools coming through the system >> Bridgeport Public Schools and then system lower case. Like the Can it first paragraph? Can it just say this the system will maintain access than the BPS system. Cuz you're saying it's just the system itself. Right, like the operating system. >> So. Not the not the school system, the computer operating system. Yeah. Cuz it's not Bridgeport Public Schools, it's just the system itself. Just take out Bridgeport Public Schools. System. I would I would eliminate school and put Through the chair, it it's not referring to the school system, people. It's referring to the information technology system, so the operating system. The operating system will maintain. That's how I read it. If you if you guys concur. That

119makes more sense, actually. Okay. So, I'm going to do the motion for So, motion to revise policy 3520.11A as discussed. Second. All right. Motion made and properly seconded. Um any further debate on that? All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All right. That one goes. Okay. Um pal policy 3524.1c. This is just a a a a general question. So, it's talking about the pest management and I and there's all types of requirements. And I wanted to know if this is in the parent handbook um cuz there's requirements that we have to provide this to the parents. Is this are we going to give this entire 3,000 policy to the class to our parents or is a subsection of this within the parent handbook? It's on the website. Indicate how parents may register

120for prior notice. >> Mr. Chair. Go ahead. So, these are part of I think three or four policies that are state mandated. So, we can double-check on the notification of parents about these or whether we need to post the entire policy or if we can post part of it to the parent handbook. Okay. The The other thing that I was wondering like I remember um Dr. Avery at the beginning of the school year he ended up sending a notification about asbestos and I'm thinking, "Oh my gosh, as I'm going through this document, there are so many compliance items and how do we ensure that we're consistently complying with everything in this policy?" And I'm wondering if you we can bundle some of those items to make sure that we're compliant. Mr. Chair. Go ahead. So

121So, this is specific to the hazardous material in school that was state-approved by statute. We can check with the city attorney's office if there's a separate asbestos or other hazardous materials, but this is these are all essentially directly from the state statute that they you know, essentially copied and pasted it into the policy, but we can check on asbestos. Okay. If it's if it's not in this policy, it might be in another. Right. I think uh Mr. Scaramouche Oh, you're done? Okay. Miss Esterman, can I have a minute? Okay. Um policy 3524.1b Um so item number 10, like halfway through and I will say Sorry, can you say it again? 35 Um R3524.1b Um bullet number 10, halfway through 1 2 3 4 5, line item 5 it says obtain the services of a certified

122pesticide applicator. Oh, that it got fixed. Okay, in my version it said certifies and it Okay. Never mind. Um Um so in policy 3524 .1c item number 19, there's um it goes back to my earlier comment. Item number 19, there's another compliance item here. Um and I was wondering to make sure we like comply with all these things, can we like automate some of these items? To make sure that they are they actually get like done. And the reason for it, there's like easily over 10 compliance items in this document alone, and that doesn't even account for other. So, that's the reason why I'm asking, can we try to automate some of these things? Um I mean, that's Is this a question you have for the board or the the staff? The staff. All right.

123I think So, like how are they tracking that we're doing this? So, through the chair again, we can double-check with the chief operations officer about how they send notices for pesticide applications and and those kind of things. Okay. Yeah. And And this is really just in case we use pesticides. I I realize we have a entire green cleaning program that we really try not to use the that stuff. Um So, >> Before you go on, Mr. Shaber? Yeah, I that's what I was ask That That's sort of what I wanted to understand. This is when and if we're using pesticides, right? >> Yeah. This is all if we're using these things. This is So, this is not sort of some hope sort of heads-up we may be using these. Um this you know, the the

124asbestos question you asked, I I remember when we cleared out a section of Blackham for asbestos, and then it had to be duly notified. Um but otherwise, we're not dealing with some general notice at the beginning of the year. We This is our policy. This is like we just want to make sure that when we do something, we we make sure we follow policy. Right? Miss Hestermera? Yes. Yes. Okay. All right. I just want to make sure. All right. >> And you say this is a question of of certifying, you know, making sure that we're Yeah, and the policy does say a few times like the district will attempt to not use pesticides because they are harmful and they'll try every other avenue and will only use pesticides as as a last resolution. Um if

125there's no any other comments on that one, I'll move to the next policy. It's 3524.2c. And this one um has some language in parentheses that I think should be struck out. Which which number? Sorry. Uh 3524 .2c. Right there. So it's if no website is available, the board must make the policy publicly available or available upon request. Um and the reason why I thought that needed to be struck out is because we we do have a website where we post all these policies at. Okay. Yeah. May I? Yeah. Comment. >> Mr. Garwick? Yeah, I'm not I'm not really sure about that because not everybody has a computer. So maybe we want to keep a hard copy on on hand for people who don't have a com- the computer. It's just maybe for a foyer purposes

126or whatever, just on it's just somebody to look at. If that's the case, then I think we and I agree Right. Then this needs to be rewarded because it says if there's no website available and we do have a website available. But I do agree with you, Mr. Sacalovic, that if someone wants this, then we should be able to print it out and give it to them. Okay, so if no website is available So if we just take out the part that says if no website is available and have it read the board must make the policy publicly available upon request. Mr. Sacalovic Apologies for intruding. It doesn't matter what you say. It's publicly available through FOI if someone wants to make an FOI request. I think the only difference is if they come in

127and say I'd like a copy per FOI you can charge them. And and I don't know why you want to deviate from that, frankly, but that's up to you. Um but by not having it in there does not alleviate you from the obligation to make hard copies available. Right. And and to your point, they it is in com- in com- it's embedded somewhere else in policy that we do have the charges, right? I believe, yeah. I would draw that and I think I I think I'll go withdraw my suggestions to Mr. Ramirez and support the deletion of that line. Okay. Do you make an amendment to strike it? Okay. Um so uh I can make the motion. So motion to remove in policy 3524.2c the language in parentheses. Second. Yeah. Um motion made and seconded.

128Um all any debate on that? All in favor say I. I. I. I. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All right. Go ahead. Okay. In the same exact edit for 3524.2b as in boy. Where is it? Um at the very bottom just above definitions. Okay. Um Did you say b as in boy? Yeah, 3524.2b. In the regulation? Under notice requirements. Page five. Are you on Oh, right there. Daniel. Yeah. So right above definitions you strike it. Motion to strike the item in parentheses, the sentence in parentheses. Second. All right. Um any further debate? All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? That passes. Um policy 3532, I have a question on the second paragraph, I guess. Um it's just after the numbers. It says superintendent should be advised immediately by the city of any

129claims against the insurance. Wouldn't that be city attorneys or city city's insurance? Should we specify who with the city cuz there's a bunch of departments that we work with. Through I Go ahead, Dr. Siano. Uh through the chair, I don't know that that applies, correct? I don't know that advised immediately by the city any claims. Um Dr. Siano, do you mean that that doesn't apply because we have our own insurance? So we would be contacted directly. Uh if I may ask from what I'm hearing, the district Both the district and the city were self-insured. Both health insurance, automobile pretty much even liability, if you want to put it that way. So we're self-insured, we pay as we go, if you want to call it that way. Even on workers unemployment. We're self-insured with unemployment, we're

130self-insured with workers comp. But the premium is you know, in all fairness, not really insurance, the premium would be outrageous. Let's just call it call it what it is. So, we're self-insured. When there's a lawsuit brought by somebody on behalf of the district, it generally gets sent to city attorney's office, Mark. And I said, "Am I right?" Yes, I generally agree with everything you said with one caveat. I believe, and you would know this from your prior role with the city, I believe the city's finance department carries insurance for facilities, for the buildings. For facilities, but So, it's a $750,000 deductible. You got to hit 750 before a claim make the claim. So, the district eats or the city eats up What if a claim comes in? We still >> comes in, $2 million. Once

131we hit the first 750, the insurance comes the insurance kicks in. >> As as the second aspect goes, when a claim or a lawsuit comes in, they are filed through the city clerk's office and then referred to the city attorney's office. So, I think all of that is beyond this. I believe this talks strictly to insurance. Mr. Traber. Oh, it What that essentially says is the language is fine. It's vague, but it's fine. Okay, right. Okay. Through the chair, I think, you know, we didn't catch this at the board meeting last week or or at the committee, but, you know, would you consider, you know, again, sending this specific policy to just to review because I'm I don't know that in Bridgeport that the Board of Ed maintains its own insurance for those six categories.

132I would like to clarify things today and then I I understand, but I don't But I know you don't have to you don't need I wish we had caught it's you know it's What is this section? It's called insurance. It's 35 32 insurance. >> 35 32. 5 what? >> 32. So it's saying that the superintendent has to obtain insurance coverage for the district, but I don't think that applies in in Bridgeport. It's again it's a CAB model policy for districts in Connecticut. However, like Mr. Corrado did with the um financial control the internal control policy, this might be something that we might We've got Mark here and we've got the action. Mr. Scallon, I I could I think I got a suggestion to fix this. Superintendent was the designation to ensure appropriate insurance coverage for

133the district. It's like he's ensuring that we're getting it. He's not obligated either way. And I think that'll cover both things and we've got the attorney right here. Can we weigh in? I agree with you because I don't know that the Board of Ed carries any policies on its own. They may, but I don't know of that. I know the city insures buildings that it owns and I think it includes the schools in that. I also know that both the city and um the Board of Ed are self-insured and what it's not uninsured, but self-insured for purposes of both third-party liability and workers' comp and motor vehicles. The only motor vehicle insurance I'm aware of that the city carries direct with a a policy company would be the WPCA, I believe, and Joyce some of

134the vehicles. That that is correct, but WPCA is a separate quasi entity with a different EIN number. So, yeah, I think Well, they're they're a city department, but you're correct, they're an enterprise fund >> An enterprise funded by a separate user fee. That's correct. Yep. Mr. Traynor. Okay, again, I believe that the language is still fine as it is. And I don't I I understand what you're seeking to do with your proposal. And I don't think it's far off. But the superintendent obtaining the coverage, whether the superintendent has obtained it directly or indirectly through the city, the superintendent has obtained the coverage. It doesn't say buy it. It doesn't say contract for it. It just says obtain. And obtain is a vague enough for me, um you know, I'm sure that we have it. Uh

135you know, I think obtain is sufficiently vague that I think you're correct. Because for example, work the workers' comp commission has specifically been requested 40 years ago and has consistently approved us being self-insured. Again, not uninsured. We don't carry a policy. It's a pay-as-you-go. So, I agree with you. >> I I think the language is sufficiently vague in all those areas that we are not you know, we don't need to to to to fine-tune this. And this this the part down below where the city has to um uh the the superintendent shall be advised immediately by the city of any claims against this insure the insurance. Again, if there is somebody who tripped on the sidewalk and decided to sue us both, the city's going to let us know. I think all that stuff is

136sufficiently vague that the city is going to let us know. So, if somebody if the somebody sues, the city attorney's office will pick up the phone and call us and say, "Hey, somebody is suing us both." Um We're not only going to let you know, We're going to represent you. >> [laughter] >> So, I I just I think it stands up to our needs. Yeah, I want to Yeah. Ms. Estemera-Hovnanian has Yeah, no, I was going to say after hearing that explanation, I'm I actually feel pretty good about this policy and I don't think we need any further changes. Um I do have I do have more. Um Wait, wait, Mr. Skaloudvik wasn't done. No, he is. Oh, I'm sorry. You're right. Go ahead. You can continue. Okay. Um policy R 3541F This is a

137small grammatical um change. Wondering in item C under miscellaneous regulations Okay. So, it says except for magnet transportation across school attendance area lines in not permitted, I think that should say is not. And that That one can be written off as a typo. Yeah. Um that's it for this one. Um policy 3541.44, I had a question around this one. Um it's talking about transportation and teachers bringing kids in their private vehicles, but it says any teacher, so it looking at one to third paragraph. So, it says any teacher or parent using a private vehicle to transport students on a regular basis must provide evidence of liability insurance. Now, that says I just wanted to clarify for my own knowledge. That's if I was like picking up my kids and other students, right? This is not

138me just picking up my kids at school. I have to be transporting other kids than than my own. Is that correct? Like for sporting events or something like that. Through the chair. >> Yes, that is it. I I believe it's a carpool provision. You know, if you're on your street, if you're picking up a couple kids and taking them to and from school in your car, you need to you know, if it's more than your own. Or if you're driving them to a field trip or practice. If you have a couple athletes in the that kind of thing. I don't think it it means I think on a regular basis is the What's this policy? Uh which one are you on? It's 35 3541.44 private vehicle I think that makes sense. That's that's the way

139I was reading it, but I just wanted to double check. Yeah, through the chair. Those first two items number one and two define Yeah. And then the third paragraph just says if if a parent is going to do number one or two, they need to show us that they have liability insurance. Okay. Thank it. Okay. Thank you. Um 35 Next Next policy I have is 3541.5A. This is also a grammatical one. Uh regulation 3541.8. Yes. >> 41.5A. Sorry, 0.5A. 0.5A. Yeah. Right. >> [laughter] >> And I'm looking at 3A. And there should be it reads I think Okay, the principal and nurse of the school nearest to the accident. So, add to after nearest. Okay, and that's it for this one. Um Okay. Next one, sorry. Regulation 3542A. 3542A. This one references um foodstuffs. I

140don't think stuffs is a word. Can we rename that to say food-related items? I am under department supervision. Second paragraph in that section. Of foodstuffs? Oh, okay. Um It's a regulation 3542A. Um food service. Yeah. Under department supervision. Second paragraph. In the absence of director of food services including the acquisition of foodstuffs. Okay. Uh keep going down, Daniel. Uh a little a little lower. Department Department supervision. Lower. Keep going. And then the second paragraph, uh second line. Uh yeah, acquisition of foodstuffs. Above that. Actually is a word. Yeah, it is it is a word. >> Is it Foodstuffs is a word? It's one it's one word. Yeah. Okay, I learned a new word today. There you go. >> [laughter] >> I thought it was. It's raw material. Raw material. That's what it's for. Raw or

141processed substance consumed to provide nutritional support and energy. Okay. I then withdraw my my comment there. Um Um regulation 3542D, I'm almost done, guys. I know it's late. I'm sorry. >> 3542 3542D the regulation >> This is also grammatical and I will say I would have given these to Daniel earlier on, but I literally finished today. Under payment responsibilities second paragraph um it says copied of this press release, it should be copies with an S. Probably a typo. Yeah. Okay. Um general question Um there's a lot of pest management and nutrition stuff in in this policy Has um both Mr. Garcia and the director of the nutrition center reviewed this these documents to make sure they're um implementable. Through the chair, yes, so the director of nutrition and the chief operations officer reviewed these and

142we you'll see some corrections in the food service policy based on the director of the nutrition center's recommendations. Perfect. I was hoping you would say that. Um okay, so moving right along 35 regulation 3542C um and I think this is up for debate. So farm to school program which I really like um it says that farm to school program will have a preference if you will over over other bidders but earlier in this policy it says that the lowest bidder basically wins and we're kind of contradicting each other. So we I feel like we need to take we need to take a stance what what takes precedent the lower bid or farm to school? I would say that whatever is in the policy So number would take precedence over the regulation, right? So So it's

1433542C and it's the the regulation we're looking at. Okay. Uh Since we since we got the city attorney here I think we should take advantage of him. Um Would is that would that be a legal preference to prefer one over another if it's a lowest bid? Usually the criteria is the lowest responsible and responsive bidder. Price is not only Um it depends if you're doing an RFP or an RFQ, price is not the sole function. If it's a sealed bid, price is the sole function and determinant so long as you meet the qualifications to be a responsive and responsible bidder. Right, but how how about like memorializing a specific entity within our policies to or regulations to have preference regardless against >> Yes, well, that would completely, I believe, deviate from our procurement policies. The

144Board of Ed follows the city's procurement policies. Um and uh you can purchase [clears throat] in a variety of ways, including off the state bid list, but we don't have specific built-in preferences that I'm aware of for and I think it would be improper to do so. So again, since I was checking something different at the time, what is the language that we're looking to Can you repeat that, um Rizza? Yeah, it's all other factors being equal, the board shall give preference to the RFP or bid that promotes and purchases >> Let's We're not on the right page. We're We have to go down a little bit to find this uh from the school program. Third paragraph. No, it's on the regulation. Yeah. >> Yeah. Farm to school program. Yep. So it's that last sentence.

145Wait. Why does yours look different? Maybe it's updated already. Is your Are you on the regulation? Okay. Yeah, mine does look different, too. On mine, it does say a farm-to-school program optional revision/addition to policy. So, if what Danielle has is like the latest and greatest, then what I have is a So, you didn't It didn't make it It didn't make it into the final? >> Is that? Yeah. Well, on our portal, we're seeing the regulation farm-to-school program on page of of that specific 3542, it's on um page 15. Which I don't know if it's on page 15 for you if you have a larger document. It's the All right. So, we have um it's under business non-instructional operations, uh food service um farm-to-school program. All right there. Yeah. Yeah, so it's that last sentence under

146So, under farm-to-school program, first paragraph, last sentence. All other factors being equal. Yep. Optional, okay. Oh, I thought it said page. Okay, but this basically says that everything else being equal we're going to pick them. And everything else being equal means price. We have the price first. I don't see a I don't see a problem with that language provided that that is listed in the bid or the RFP that's issued. Because if it's in your bylaws or your policy but it's not in the public bid it's not it's not giving adequate notice to the bidders. So, if you're going to leave that language in there somebody better make sure that it's in every public bid that goes out. Which goes back to the question Rice asked a moment ago about making sure the director of

147nutrition has read through this language. If we're serious about this program Well and the state is pushing this program. I mean, this is a program near and dear to the heart of the state, too. Although we certainly are not pushing it to the degree that we're going to ignore costs. Obviously, but we are interested in encouraging local produce be used. Are you um Marisa, you had just mentioned that the policy said something different It does. than the regulation? But I'm looking at I think it's the same. I unless I'm missing something in the actual policy above. I So, the policy says that we we will select the the lowest bidder. So, in my thought process this almost says that we're we're going to give preference to farm to school program. So if let's say for

148example, there's a bidder that's slightly above the lowest bidder, but it's a farm-to-school program, we would go with them rather than the lowest bidder. So, there's a potential contradiction there unless I'm reading this incorrectly. Just to clarify, I don't know if I see it in the policy the lowest bidder, unless I'm missing something. So, about the lowest bidder. It It's not in this 3542, it's in the 3000 series somewhere, and I did not label it. >> the Not specific to the farm to service schools. >> to the farm. >> bids in general. Okay. Yes. The concept of going with the lowest bidder is emblazoned in the city's uh purchasing ordinance, which you follow. I think as Commissioner Traub said a minute ago, you have qualifying language here, which says all other factors being equal, the

149board shall give preference to the RFP or bid that promotes the purchase of local farm products. Now, in an RFP, price is not the sole selective criteria, so they do a weighing and a grading of comparisons. But in a sealed bid, price is the determining quote quotient. And if local farm products are more expensive, then they're not getting it because all other factors are not equal. The only factor that matters in the sealed bid is price and that you're a responsive and responsible bidder. So, the flexibility is going to be in the RFP process. I would suggest that if you want to leave that language for now, that's fine, but I would strongly [snorts] suggest that whoever's doing the purchasing, I know there's a purchasing agent uh specifically assigned to the Board of Ed out

150of the city's purchasing department. I would want to make sure that the uh whoever's purchasing for nutrition sits down with that person whenever they're doing their bids and maybe even talks about this specific item. Mr. Callaway. Yeah, um so that's not the again, would um would it be like if we when we put out the RFP, would it be like do we do something similar to like the minority preference points as bonus points or something like that when we put them out? Well, um So the In the RFP, you know, you in an RFP, you could you could theoretically issue an RFP that says we uh only want local farm respondents. Now, that's going to kill your price because I actually coincidentally heard something this very day on the radio. Someone was talking about local

151promoting local farms and they said in Connecticut, only 2% of the food consumed in Connecticut is produced in Connecticut. So, you're not getting a lot of local product for a competitive price that I'm aware of. But I'm I'm not looking to weigh in on the policy game. >> Right, right. Yeah, I My concern is just overburdening the people writing these things. Microphone. Thank you. >> If we had a bid for apples, a contract for apples, then you could do it you could conceive you if you had a selected bid. Cuz we do snacks, you know, something like that. You could see doing it like that. Listen, you're not you're not doing it I mean, you're not doing a broad-based. You're doing something very narrow. Right. If you're if you're specifically focused on purchasing local farm

152products, you're probably not going to want to do a sealed bid because price is going to right, defeat it. You're going to have to do an RFP or an RFQ and you're going to have to also be cognizant of the fact that while it is a laudable public policy to try to support local vendors and local producers you also have to recognize that what have you just been going through? A budget crisis. Mhm. A budget crisis. So, there's trade-offs. It's wonderful for the state to have a policy. I'm not against that policy, but there's a cost to that policy conceivably and that is that you have less money for other needs of the district. So, you need to think carefully about um how much of this um discretionary expenditure you want to engage in, that's

153all. All right. And And see seeing as this is a optional revision and it's not embodied in the process and we can actually do it later and add it to the RFPs, I would suggest not adopting that specific regulation. >> optional revision. It's a There's already a policy on it. Well, there's already a policy on it. So, this is just a regulation. We already have a If we adopt the actual 3000 series of policies right above it Just This piece is optional. >> Just to layer in over that, that's actually a great suggestion. Because of your financial needs and the fact that this is going to get determined on a case-by-case basis when you go out for procurement, I would suggest that there's no necessity to put it in your policy, but you should bring

154that goal to the attention of whoever's doing your purchasing both in the department and in the purchasing department of the city and make sure that wherever they think it's appropriate and you want to spend the money, then you put it in there. But, putting it in here raises the spectre that you're going to do it on almost a universal basis, and I don't think that's your intent. All right. Um so, do we want to make a more I can make the motion just to strike out that entire paragraph, those two paragraphs? Is there a motion made? I'll second. Second by Mrs. Kalabic. Um seeing no debate, all in favor say "Aye." Aye. Aye. To strike the paragraph? Uh no, just the farm to the just the farm to How was I going? Oh, 1 2

155Just those two paragraphs under farm to school. Yep. Perfect. Okay. Almost done. We have to pause. We lost quorum. 1 2 3 Yeah, we lost quorum. Oh, oh, we can't even call a phone. 5 minute recess. We can't take a vote yet. Or Yeah. Yeah. Just check that one again. Yeah. If you get really uh Albert the job. >> Don't Madam Chair, don't we have quorum? We have you, Joe. No, we only have two people in person right now. Somebody stepped out out to the bathroom. Oh, okay. Got you. All right, we we have quorum. We can take the vote um checking that paragraph. So, all in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All right, that passes. Uh do you have more, Ms. Esterman or Ms. Yeah, I I have just two more.

156Good. Um and these two more are just like strike outs of language that doesn't apply to the district. So, uh P3542.41A. That's 3542.41A. 1 2 3 4 5 the fifth paragraph, it's talking about districts with 20 2,400 students, 2499 or less. If that doesn't apply to us, should this even be in in here? Yeah, I think we could strike that. That's what I was thinking. Okay. What say you? You think? Yeah. I would strike. So, the motion's been made at strike that paragraph. >> Second. Um and it's seconded by Mr. Zucalbic. Motion was made by Mr. Traver. Okay. Anything else on that page before we No. Okay. So, all in favor say I. I. >> I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All right. Um The next one? Okay. Next one, similar. Um R 3542.41c. Um this

157is a regulation, so I don't I'm not sure if it's appropriate, but to strike it out, but items one and two are for smaller districts. So, they're for students under 10,000. So, my proposal is to strike out one and two, but I'm not sure if that's appropriate or not. You had it. You had it. >> Actually had it. Yeah. Yeah, starts there. So, number one and then go down? What's number two? Oh, wait. It's for students. What did you say? One and two? Yeah. Oh, there we go. Okay. Yeah, cuz the one that really applies to us is number three. Okay. Do you think Just a process question if I could Madam Chair. I'm a little confused as to why in your policies you're repeating state regulations or state statutes. That's not the purpose of

158a policy. This may be the law but I don't even know why it's in here. This one's a regulation. >> Regulation of who? State regulation? It's got to be a state regulation because it's talking about other districts. Why? But so that this is from the model from CABE so I think it was probably optional. Yeah, I think they just finished with it. Yeah. We don't just take that stuff and throw it into ours. I mean these are great at it. Great at it. I can't imagine there's probably more that we missed because CABE is giving you soup to nuts and they're probably expecting you to tailor them to your system. At a minimum, I would wholeheartedly agree we ought to take out anything that we recognize does not apply to our district. And I don't

159know why it says uh at the beginning of the title "Minimum Standards for all school nutrition program directors." It should be for the city uh for the Bridgeport program director. Because we don't care about what the rules are for smaller districts. It It just Yeah, so strike the motion. Yeah, strike that and then two and its entirety and move to up to one and renumber everything. Woah, hold on. Go back to number the new number one. What What Mark just said. Uh no, no, new one. You struck all that so go back down. So for our district. Mhm. Make it specific to Bridgeport. So instead of But you had it. You had it. The school nutrition program director with local education agency with Bridgeport Public Schools. So, it strike that first sentence. Directors must meet

160the following requirements. Bridgeport Public School pro-nutrition program directors I said strike >> must meet the following requirements. I get that right? He's coming back. But, if you I'm sorry. I just jumping in again. Good. I want to follow up on what was said to me, which is these are regulations. What's the policy? >> our regulations, or is this supposed to be a compendium of state regulations that we have to abide by? In which case, just reprint their regulation. What is the title of this? These. Correct. So, the the state legislated certain policies to be passed by each Board of Education. So, there's the policy and then the regulation that goes with it. And to point, the regulations are more administrative in the district. They don't really um you know, the board obviously has a stake

161in the regulation, but it's really more of how the district can do So, the board approves the policy and according to K, the districts um you know, uses the regulation to enact the policy, but they're not um this this pest control, the food nutrition the green cleaning were all state mandated policies that we have to Now, I I don't you know, we've made updates and changes. So, it's not like you have to pass the policy 100% because you saw that there are things that we struck where they say optional. Um however, you know, we do need a policy in each of these categories. The regulations we have more flexibility with on how we enact the policies. So, we can certainly you know, make the regulations more Bridgeport specific. Um Yeah. while still adhering to the

162mandated policy that's required. Mr. Sikorski. >> Thank you for the help. Yeah, yeah, as far as as far as the policies in the state and being state mandated, um a lot of that language I'm not sure if the state language is what's to include all of the things that they suggest. They suggest that uh school districts must have policies 10,000 This number must have a policy for this and this number must have a policy for that and that number must have a policy for that and not that you got to include each and every one in there. I don't think that's the intention of the statutes to create that. Mr. Superintendent. Okay, so in this, is the state mandating that we have regulations that match the policies? Stop. I understand. Mr. Chair, so those those

163specific policies, the green cleaning, the food service, and the pest control had regulations that go with the policy that the state required the boards to pass the policy and the regulations. So, you have to have a policy for each of those and a regulation to go with it where you notify the public how you're going to do your pest control, how you're going to do your food service, and how you're going to do your green cleaning. But, we're to to the board's point, we can edit within that policy to make it specific for our own local district. However, we're required to have those three policies generally as written so that it satisfies the statute that we have to pass those three policies according to statute. But there is some flexibility with the regulation on how

164we word I understand. But we're required the policy all those three policies came with the regulation. I got to tell you I'm more confused than ever. I have no idea why the state would adopt a state policy which is mandatory and then tell you you have to adopt their policy. It's already state law. If it's a state regulation, if it's a regulation of the state, it's binding on you. Only the portions that apply to you. I could see you having a policy that says we're going to adhere to regulation number such and such. Why are we rewriting their regulations picking and choosing what applies to us? A state regulation is like a statute. It's binding on you. There's regs for every department of the state and you have to adhere to them. You don't have

165to take and pick and choose and adopt your own. I don't know who's giving this advice, but it doesn't make sense to me. That's all I can tell you. It It's a nonsensical Right. I can't say that cuz maybe I don't know enough to say that. >> Yeah, I agree. But it seems very odd that they would say, "We adopted a mandatory state regulation. Now we want you to adopt a policy that says you'll abide by our regulation and you're free to rewrite it for the portions that apply to you." It just doesn't line up. Yeah, I I I I agree with Dan Anastasi. And just one question, if we leave it alone in the interest of time, it doesn't harm us any, right? I would I would say let's take out what we don't

166need, though. We don't need the Yeah, we don't need the small districts. So I think we struck that And then if you know, if we could just change the language of that new one school nutrition program director, just put the nutrition director nutrition program director will meet the following requirements cuz we already know where at 10,000 And then we need district. You need to pass both the adoption. Yes. Yeah. So, the amendment. So, you made amendment to I need motion to strike motion to strike. That's not what it was. One and Motion to strike one and two in its entirety and renumber everything else to conform with the policy. >> Okay. Is there a second? All right. Um any further debate on that? No. So, all in favor say I. I. I. Any Any opposed?

167Any abstentions? All right. That passes. Um And again, this is something that can come before us later on if we need to adjust it. For the sake of having the policy there, we'll we'll adopt it. Um Any other changes? One last one. The last one. Uh >> I feel like you said one last one already, but we'll let you go. Oh, I'm sorry. That was [laughter] not accurate. This one's really the last one. Um regulation 3543.31c. Um it talks about retention of electronic records and the language is a little bit antiquated talking about like removable disks and all of that, but we're not talking about like cloud-based right there. And my question is should we put something like what we use, SharePoint or cloud-based devices or systems to also be included as part of this

168um section B or five. Um Say you're um Tell us again where you are cuz I'm on the road. Eight. Oh, I see you. Yep. So, this is I'm getting there. Um So, when the bullets 1 through 5, [snorts] Mhm. Some of this stuff is kind of like old. It doesn't really cover cloud-based like saving places like SharePoint or the iCloud. I know this again is a state regulation, correct? Yes. The state has an entire multitude of records retention policies. They're They're mandatory. They apply to every municipality. There are ones that apply to police departments, personnel records, everything. For the life of me, I have no idea why we are re-adopting state regulations that already exist. This whole process What? is at odds. What about five on that answer? Manage at the server by an

169automatic classification system. Would that be like a cloud? I don't know. I don't know. I'm not into tech like that. Don't worry. Sorry. If I may if I may interject, the language actually reads which may include the following. It doesn't look >> So, it's not limited. and exhaustive. So, I think everything else is Okay. And maybe that would be a good addition. But I'm going to man. Yeah. Through the chair to Danielle. These are all These regulations relate to the series 3000 policies. Yep. Did the prior version of our 3000 policies list these regulations or is this something new that >> It's on the D and A deleted. regulations normally board approved policy and the regulation was normally under the district's control and how they were going to implement and succeed their policy. I think

170Because I got to be honest with you. If I was the state, I would now have to go and review every one of your rewritten regulations to see if you deleted them properly so that they are in compliance with the state regulation. To To my mind, we should be adopting policies that adhere and require adherence to the state regulations. And you apply the portions that apply to you instead of trying to rewrite them. Now you're going to have You're going to have three sets of documents. Our policies, the state regulations, and our own tailored regulations. So, who are we dealing with at the state that told us to do this? It's Sorry, it's through the State Department of Education. Um part of the forensic audit. We needed to enact 3000 series, 2000 series, and 9000

171series policies to address some of the findings in the in the audits from the state. >> Policies is great, but you're saying that the policies require us to include the regulation. Cert- certain policies do. Yeah. Those Our policies are policies that state said we had to include. The three for tonight in the 3000 series, the green cleaning, the food service, and the pest control were required state policies that included regulations in that >> Like that. All the state is saying is you have to adhere to our regulations. Not that you have to rewrite them to Right. As it was presented to us, the guidance from the state and from K was that to adopt it it as written. As written. But we're not doing that. We're tailoring them. Yeah. It's the board. It's Right and

172this It's the board's prerogative. Everybody's point to state and K and everybody who's been before us. When it was suggestions to make common sense revisions to tailor it to our district is like, oh no, no, no. We We got We got to leave it like this. The K is the professionals. Leave it like it is. However, K got 169 districts in the state. Also got 169 districts. They're not And I guarantee the state does not want 169 versions of their rewritten regulation. What they want you to do is adopt the policy that references the state regulations and says we're going to adhere to it right to the extent it applies to us. Right. That's what we should be doing. We're So I If K is the one that said leave it as the state drafted

173it, I would agree with that. What we've done tonight, for better or worse, through good motive and everything, is to try to tailor it to us. But that, I think, is just going to create massive confusion. And And I hate to say it, but if you want to adopt these, fine, because you got to get them out. They're pressuring you. But we should take a real hard look at just referencing the existing state regulations, which is the law anyway, and stop trying to kill ourselves to create a third document. Mrs. K. Yeah. Yeah, just trying to figure out the best way forward to get this actually done this evening. I I suggest that we just pass the policies as is and remove the regulations or put all the language back into the regulations that was

174amended this evening. Yeah, that's that's that's how I say it. I don't want to come back again. Mr. Tabor. Well, I I I if I'm I am understanding that there there are essentially two things here. I don't know how we became intertwined, but there is two things we're voting on. One is policy, one is regulation. And it sounds eminently reasonable to me what council is saying, which is the regulation is a perhaps misguided effort. And the policy is what we need to do for the sake of passing muster with the state. So, it we can vote to pass as as presented on the agenda, the approval of revised policy series 3000. Now, it just happens that in that we're voting on, we also played around with the regulations, which is irrelevant to what we're passing

175tonight. Um and in fact, when we when when um when the administration checks, we're going to find out that council was right. And that everything that we did there was for naught because the regulation stands as written by the state. Um and so, it was an exercise in futility. Um and so, chalk that one up to lesson learned. Um we didn't need to do that. It was there for the sake of advising us on what our policy needed to be consistent with, not for us to play around with. Um and so, lesson learned. Who over there? So, what we passed tonight is still passed in terms of policy. Um, and so we're fine. And we vote tonight to pass the policy and if the regulation was allowed to be played around with, we played around

176with it. If it wasn't, it it goes back to what it was. It reverts back to what the state mandated. And we didn't we didn't do anything wrong. Miss Ann Southworth >> Or you could The the law prevails. We're going to at the end of this, we're going to adopt all the amendments to the policies. And we're going to leave the state regulations the way they were written. But if you want to Well, whatever we vote on, the law prevails. So, if we say we're going to pass the policy and the regulatory changes we made, and then we find out, oops, can't do that, oops, the law says that that that those regulatory changes can't be done, and we go back it reverts back to the regulate state regulations as is. Right? Yeah, whatever either

177solution I guess. Right. That is what that that is what happens. The law The law trumps whatever we did. Um, Danielle has her hand up. Danielle. Do you have a microphone? I'll allow you now. Just for clarity, I want everyone to know that I found the list of the state mandated ones. I have the list if anyone wants me to read them that are the state mandated in case we make changes so that it's on the record or we can go ahead as Rob said. Mark. You have to read You can read them. Six state mandated They did what? They've already adopted regulations. Are they mandating we adopt regulations? Why you have to adopt something that's already the law is confusing to me. What do What do they say in their notice? Well, they're telling

178us that these are These are state These are policies that What was that exactly, Chris? That are were mandated to have. Right. And you're doing that. My question is, where are they asking us to either adopt state regulations cuz you don't get to adopt statutes and regulations. They apply to everybody, whether you like it or not. You don't have to adopt them. So, it maybe they wanted us to adopt policies that reference the state regulations. That would make certain sense because now you have them all in one place. But, if you're going to do that, it makes sense to adopt the regulation as written by the state and not tailoring it to us. When we read it, we know what applies to us. It's like reading a statute that says a municipality with more than

179125,000 people does X and below that you do Y. You don't rewrite the statute. You would adhere to what applies to you. So, Well, I I agree. >> I would think the cleanest thing would be to adopt the amendments to the policies and leave the state regulations the way they're drafted. There's nothing compelling us to amend. Even if they said we could amend them, they didn't say we had to amend the state regs, did they? Uh through the chair, no. It's just It's the policies that are required. But, in this case, the regulations came with the the policy. And I think, you know, their point would be that there's probably a public interest in some of those cases to alert how you're managing that policy. What is your pest control system? What's your food service

180purchasing? You know, the regulation, how you manage it. >> reference those and attach them to the policy as drafted. Just say this is the state regulation and in our policy we're adhering to state regulations. And I apologize to you for jumping in here. But That's That's Um it is, but Um the Make a motion to approve the policy series 3000. Um as amended tonight. You You want to second? >> Yeah, yeah. And today I just want to maybe add a little something. Leaving the implement Leaving the implementation up to the superintendent. Well, cuz that'll that'll cover him doing the regulations. No. What now? No. I'm approving the policy series 3000 as amended tonight. Second. Miss Assistant Superintendent S. Yes. Your hand is up. Sorry. Oh. Oh, sorry. I forgot I had it up. Um I

181just wanted to say I went through all our voting and there was only two regulations which we made edits to. So, I'm not sure if you we wanted to go back and just like withdraw those. Um No or not. Yeah. I'm approving the policy series Okay. Just the policies you're saying or the regulations? Um I made a motion to approve the policy series 3000. Policy series 3000 as presented to us. A- as What [laughter] was your motion say one more time for it? I move to approve the revised policy series 3000. >> Okay. Wasn't second it. Um A- as amended tonight. As amended tonight. Um, okay, seeing no further questions. All in favor say I. I. >> I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? All right, that passes. Mrs. Kalb do you have something about you? Okay.

182Ooh. All right. You know, thank you Dr. Stano for all this and Danielle and anybody else in your office who's been I know sweating and crying over these policies for us. I appreciate you guys. I know what the board appreciates the work you've done. So, thank you so much. Um, And we're And we really didn't know what >> We're not done yet. All right. Uh, who wants to adjourn the meeting? >> Motion to adjourn. Motion made by Mrs. Kalb. I'll second it. All in favor say I. >> I. Meeting adjourned. Meeting adjourned at 10:06. Good night everybody.