001Melissa Snively: GOOD MORNING. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS WORKSHOP OF TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER THE 8th, 2020, OF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD TO ORDER. WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT OUR SCHOOL BOARD POLICIES TODAY. I BELIEVE EITHER MR. PORTER -- IS MR. PORTER GOING TO -- Jim Porter: [INAUDIBLE] Melissa Snively: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MS. DAVIS, DO YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND START US OFF THEN? THANK YOU. [INAUDIBLE] [MICROPHONE NOT ON] Melissa Snively: MS. DAVIS, IS YOUR MICROPHONE ON? OKAY. JUST MAKING SURE. GET A LITTLE CLOSER? Melissa Snively: OKAY. THANK YOU. I APOLOGIZE. Melissa Snively: VERY GOOD. GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED, THEN. Jim Porter: BY THE WAY, BOARD MEMBERS, MS. DAVIS HAS DONE A WONDERFUL JOB OF ORGANIZING THIS AND KEEPING EVERYONE ON TRACK WITH THE POLICY CYCLES. SHE SHOULD BE COMMENDED FOR THAT.
002BOARD MEMBERS, AS YOU RECALL, THIS BOARD DECIDED YOU'LL DO POLICIES ON A REGULAR BASIS. THE GOAL WAS TO TRY TO DO THEM FOUR TIMES A YEAR QUARTERLY SO THAT IT COULD BE A SORT OF ROLLING PROCESS. THAT OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE EVENTS OF THE LAST FEW MONTHS HAS SORT OF BEEN SIDETRACKED. THIS IS SORT OF WHERE WE ARE AND WE'LL BEGINNING THE OTHER ONE AFTER WE FINISH THIS. AS YOU KNOW, BOARD MEMBERS CAN INITIATE POLICIES AND STAFF MEMBERS CAN INITIATE POLICIES. WE REACT TO STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, AND WE ALSO WILL REACT TO BOARD MEMBERS' DESIRE TO HAVE CERTAIN POLICIES EITHER AMENDED OR NEW POLICIES CREATED. SO WHAT YOU SEE TODAY IS THE CULMINATION OF THAT -- BOTH STAFF-GENERATED AND BOARD-GENERATED. AS KRISTEN SAID, THERE IS NO VOTE TODAY. THIS IS A DISCUSSION, WE'LL EXPLAIN
003WHY THE POLICIES HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED. WE'LL SORT OF -- I'LL TAG-TEAM WITH THE BOARD MEMBERS WHO PROPOSED THEM, AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION AND THEN DECIDE WHICH POLICIES WILL BE ADVERTISED FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO THE FIRST POLICY, IF WE CAN JUMP IN AND GET STARTED IS DEALING WITH ANTI-HARASSMENT. THIS WAS A POLICY SUGGESTED BY MS. GRAY. AND WE HAVE AN ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICY CURRENTLY. AND, BOARD MEMBERS, THIS IS SORT OF AN EXAMPLE OF WHY THE POLICIES REALLY NEED TO BE OVERHAULED. AND MR. McAULEY HAS TAKEN THAT TASK ON TO REALLY OVERHAUL THE POLICIES. WE HAVE A LOT OF REDUNDANCY THROUGHOUT THE POLICY. FOR INSTANCE, THE ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICY, THIS IS THE GENERAL ONE, BUT WE HAVE ONE FOR STUDENTS. WE HAVE ONE FOR INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF AND NONINSTRUCTIONAL STAFF. AND THEY ARE IDENTICAL EXCEPT THEY APPLY
004TO DIFFERENT GROUPS. SO MR. McAULEY HAS TASKED THE CABINET WITH LOOKING AT THE POLICIES AND THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF 2021, WE'LL BE BRINGING FORWARD TO YOU HOPEFULLY A STREAMLINED VERSION. IF THIS POLICY IS SOMETHING THE BOARD FINDS ACCEPTABLE, WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC HEARING, WE'LL BE BRINGING ALL THE PLACES IT APPLIES CURRENTLY. MS. GRAY SUGGESTED TWO THINGS. SHE WANTED TO ADD INTO THE ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICY, THE LGBTQ ACRONYM. THAT'S ADDED ON LINE 16. SHE ALSO HAS A POLICY STATEMENT ON LINE 21, WANTED TO ADD THE BOARD HAS ZERO TOLERANCE FOR HARASSMENT. THAT'S BEEN WHAT'S RECOMMENDED. I'LL LET MS. GRAY SPEAK FURTHER, IF YOU WANT TO. Lynn Gray: THANK YOU, MR. PORTER AND THANK YOU, MS. DAVIS FOR DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB COMPILING AND FILTERING THESE MANY POLICIES. IF YOU DON'T MIND, I WANT TO SAY UP
005FRONT TO OUR BOARD MEMBERS THAT SOME OF THE MATERIAL MAY BE POLITICALLY VOLATILE, AND I APOLOGIZE, BUT I FIND THERE'S NEVER A PERFECT TIME TO BRING UP CERTAIN MATTERS. SO I JUST WANT TO APOLOGIZE IF THERE'S ANYONE THAT MIGHT BE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE TOPIC. I PUT GENDER IDENTITY SPECIFICALLY TO LGBTQ. I WAS BROUGHT TO BIG BROTHERS AND BIG SISTERS, A VERY LARGE CORPORATE STRUCTURE, ONE THAT WE ACTUALLY TAKE PART IN BEING WITH AS A PARTNER, AND THEY HAD SHARED WITH ME THAT THEIR POLICY ALSO HAS CHANGED IN REGARDS TO THIS SPECIFIC GROUP BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF HARASSMENT, WHICH INCLUDES BEING BULLIED, CYBERBULLYING, HAZING, 50 TO 80% IN OUR STUDENT POPULATION HAVE BEEN TARGETS OF THIS, AND IT'S CONTINUAL. SOME OF YOU MIGHT BE SURPRISED BECAUSE HOW DO YOU GET THAT TYPE OF DATA. TALKING
006TO COUNSELORS AND PRIMARY SOURCES. SO THE RATIONALE BEHIND WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE KNOW GROUPS HAVE A TENDENCY TO BE BULLIED, BUT THIS PARTICULAR DAY AND AGE UNDER POLITICAL ADMINISTRATION, PERHAPS, BUT THERE'S A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF FEAR, AND JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RATIONALE IS SHARED WITH THE BOARD. I PUT ZERO TOLERANCE BECAUSE, AGAIN, I KNOW THE DISCIPLINE POLICY, THE STUDENT CONDUCT. I HAVE THAT, AND I HAVE MIAMI-DADE AND I'VE LOOKED TO MANY OTHERS. BUT I FIND IF WE ALLOW AS A BOARD TO BE LENIENT, THEN THE ACTUAL REALITY IS WEAKENED. SO I THINK AS A BOARD, WE NEED TO BE STEADFAST AND BEHIND IT. AND I UNDERSTAND ALSO THAT THIS MAY NOT BE VERY POPULAR, AND I RESPECT EVERYONE'S INSIGHT INTO THAT, BUT WE CAN'T HAVE OUR KIDS AND THIS GROUP BE
007BULLIED OVER AND OVER EVERY YEAR, YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR. AND THAT'S MY RATIONALE. I BELIEVE THEY NEED EQUAL PROTECTION, AND THAT IS WHAT I THINK WOULD BE THE RIGHT THING TO DO. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. WE DO HAVE SOME BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS. WE'LL START WITH MR. CONA. Steve Cona: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU, MS. GRAY FOR ADDING THIS. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT -- POLICY 1362 IS GOING TO ENCOMPASS THE OTHER COUPLE OF POLICIES THAT -- ARE WE GOING TO REMOVE OR -- Jim Porter: IF THE BOARD WANTS TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS, WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC HEARING, ADDED OTHER ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICY TO DEAL WITH INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF AND STUDENTS. THIS WAS TO MAKE SURE THE BOARD WAS OKAY WITH THIS. IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK. WE'LL
008DO IT IF THE BOARD WANTS THAT, FOR ADVERTISEMENT. IT WOULD BE REDUNDANT TO BRING IT TO YOU TODAY. Steve Cona: I DON'T WANT POLICIES STACKED ON TOP OF POLICIES. IF THIS ENCOMPASSES ALL OF THE POLICIES, THEN REMOVING THE OTHER ONES I THINK MAKES SENSE. Jim Porter: YOU'RE REFERRING TO MR. McAULEY'S EFFORT. YES, EVENTUALLY THAT'S WHERE IT WILL LAND BUT WE'RE NOT THERE YET. Steve Cona: SO THIS POLICY WAS REVISED. THE ONLY THING I'M SEEING ARE THE NINE WORDS WE'RE CHANGING. Jim Porter: CORRECT. THIS HAS BEEN A LONGTIME EXISTING POLICY. SEXUAL ORIENTATION WAS ALREADY COVERED UNDER THE POLICY. MS. GRAY WAS INCLUDING THE COMMONLY USED ACRONYM. Steve Cona: AND THEN ADDING THE BOARD HAS ZERO TOLERANCE, THE LAST SENTENCE. Jim Porter: CORRECT. Steve Cona: THAT'S ALL I HAVE. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MR. CONA. DR. HAHN.
009Stacy Hahn: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THIS BEING BROUGHT FORWARD. I DO WANT TO SAY, I DON'T THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH AS A BOARD. I THINK THE ONE THING THAT WE CAN ALL AGREE ON IS WE WANT TO PROTECT STUDENTS FROM ANY TYPE OF HARASSMENT. SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK -- I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT, YOU KNOW, KIDS SHOULDN'T BE BULLIED. I DON'T THINK WE'RE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT, MS. GRAY, IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY. IS THE ZERO TOLERANCE, IS THIS PIECE OF THE POLICY CONNECTED BACK TO OUR DISCIPLINE POLICY? Jim Porter: THE POLICY IS AN OVERALL STATEMENT. THE I'M SORRY. THE DISCIPLINE PROCEDURE IMPLEMENTS THE POLICY. THIS IS JUST A STATEMENT OF HOW THE BOARD FEELS ABOUT HARASSMENT. Stacy Hahn: OKAY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE WAS
010CONTINUITY FROM ONE PIECE TO THE OTHER. OKAY. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, DR. HAHN. MEMBER STUART. Cindy Stuart: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. SO I'M NOT A FAN OF BRINGING POLICY FORWARD WITH JUST ONE OR TWO WORD CHANGES BECAUSE I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW MUCH THIS ACTUALLY STRENGTHENS THE POLICY. I'M ABOUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO BRING POLICY FORWARD, BRING SOMETHING FORWARD THAT HAS SOME SORT OF MEAT TO IT THAT WILL ACTUALLY STRENGTHEN THE POLICY. WHAT I WOULD RATHER SEE US DO AND I'M NOT AFRAID OF THE POLICY AT ALL AND HAVE BROUGHT IT FORWARD BEFORE TO THIS BOARD IS I WOULD RATHER SEE US TAKE OUR RESOURCE GUIDE, WHICH IS A DOCUMENT THAT IS THE SUPERINTENDENT'S AND MARRY IT WITH THIS DOCUMENT. IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE CHANGES TO THIS POLICY AND WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING
011TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ADVERTISING, WHICH COSTS THIS DISTRICT MONEY AND BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND LOOKING AT IT, LET'S LOOK AT THE LGBTQ RESOURCE GUIDE FOR STAFF AND ADMINISTRATORS BUT HOW THEY SHOULD BE DEALING SPECIFICALLY WITH OUR POPULATION OF STUDENTS AND EQUAL ACCESS FOR ALL STUDENTS. I THINK IT COULD BE MARRIED WITH ALSO SOME OF OUR EQUITY POLICY, WHICH WE STILL HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO ON. SO THAT WOULD BE MY REQUEST IS THAT WE TIE THIS BACK TO NOT ONLY THE OTHER POLICIES THAT CAN REVOLVE AROUND ANTI-HARASSMENT, BUT WE MAKE SURE THAT THE RESOURCE GUIDE TIES BACK TO NOT ONLY STUDENTS BUT TO OUR TEACHING, FACULTY AND STAFF. THIS SHOULD NOT JUST BE APPLIED TO THE STUDENT BODY. WE HAVE FACULTY AND STAFF THAT DESERVE TO BE IN AN ANTI-HARASSMENT, ZERO
012TOLERANCE SITUATION AS WELL. OUR POLICY DOESN'T ALWAYS REFLECT THAT. SOMETIMES WE GET CAUGHT UP IN MAKING POLICY AROUND JUST STUDENTS. THAT WOULD BE MY REQUEST IS WE ACTUALLY TAKE A DEEPER DIVE ON THIS AND LET MR. McAULEY AND MS. VERRA LOOK AT THIS FURTHER AND ACTUALLY INCORPORATE SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE RESOURCE GUIDE WHICH HAS HAD A LOT OF ATTENTION THROUGH NUMEROUS GROUPS AND LET THEM ADD WHATEVER THEY SEE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDED TO STRENGTHEN THIS POLICY. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER STUART. I'M GOING TO JUMP IN REAL QUICK BEFORE MS. GRAY SPEAKS ONE MORE TIME, BUT I WILL AGREE WITH MEMBER STUART THAT I THINK THAT TO MAKE SURE IT ALIGNS WITH THE RESOURCE GUIDE, I THINK WE HAVE TO DO A BIT OF A DEEPER DIVE TO MAKE SURE THEY
013ARE IN ALIGNMENT WITH EACH OTHER AND WE'RE MAXIMIZING AND STRENGTHENING BOTH OF THOSE. ONE THING I HAVE ABOUT THE TERM ZERO TOLERANCE, I'M NOT SURE -- MAYBE MS. GRAY CAN SPEAK TO THIS -- I KNOW THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD BELIEVES IS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE NO TOLERANCE FOR HARASSMENT OF CHILDREN, BUT PUTTING THAT TERMINOLOGY IN THERE, DOES THAT MAKE IT A ZERO TOLERANCE OFFENSE. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. AND I THINK MS. HAHN KIND OF WAS GOING DOWN THAT ROAD A LITTLE EARLIER ABOUT THE DEFINITION OF ZERO TOLERANCE AND SHOULD WE USE SOMETHING DIFFERENT IN THE POLICY AS FAR AS TERMINOLOGY GOES? AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE SUPERINTENDENT, IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT OR NOT. I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE CONFUSION OF THE TERM ZERO TOLERANCE. Addison Davis: YES, MA'AM, THROUGH
014THE CHAIR, EVERYTHING HAS TO BE ALIGNED AND COORDINATED RELATED TO NOT ONLY POLICY RESOURCE GUIDE BUT ALSO THE CODE OF STUDENT CONDUCT. I THINK IF WE CAN DO, FROM OUR TEAM'S PERSPECTIVE, WE CAN LOOK AT EVERY DOCUMENT THAT LINKS TO POTENTIAL INTERACTION WITH STUDENTS AND THIS POLICY AND MAKE SURE IT ALL ALIGNS AND BRING IT BACK IN A COORDINATED EFFORT, IF IT'S THE WILL OF THE BOARD. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU. BECAUSE THIS IS THE WHAT, AND YOU HAVE THE HOW, AND THEY NEED TO GO TOGETHER. YOU DO THE WHAT. WE DO THE HOW. VERY GOOD. MS. GRAY. Lynn Gray: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, AND THANK YOU SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS. MY REMARK, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WITH THE STUDENT CONDUCT AND THE ZERO TOLERANCE LANGUAGE, I STUDIED THE PREVIOUS DOCUMENTS WHICH RELATES ALSO TO THE RESOURCE GUIDE
015AND TO THE EXISTING STUDENT CONDUCT, AND THE ZERO POLICY -- AND THIS SPEAKS TOWARDS SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS, THE NEED FOR ALIGNMENT AND ALSO MEMBER SNIVELY, THE ZERO TOLERANCE THAT WE HAVE PRESENTLY IS NOT ALIGNED WITH THE LGBT BUT RATHER THIS WAS MODIFIED TO REFLECT CONDUCT THAT POSES A SERIOUS THREAT TO SCHOOL SAFETY, WE ALL ARE REMINDED THERE WAS A HORRENDOUS SITUATION AT STONEMAN DOUGLAS AND POLICY HAD TO BE REDONE. REGARDING THE WORDING, THERE'S NOT A RULE, POLICY, THAT WE DON'T CHANGE POLICIES JUST BECAUSE A FEW WORDS ARE CHANGED. BUT RATHER, WE CHANGE POLICIES BECAUSE THE TIME OF OUR NATION HAS CHANGED WITHIN THE LAST 8 TO 10 YEARS. AND IF WE'RE NOT BEING PART OF THE CHANGE, THEN WE ARE GOING TO STICK WITH WHAT WE HAVE, WHICH IS A COMFORTABLE PLACE, BUT I THINK IT'S
016TIME FOR US TO BE MORE RELEVANT TO THE STUDENT POPULATION AND TO THE VOICES OF OUR CONSTITUENTS AND THOSE CHILDREN, WHICH EVERY ONE OF YOU RESPECTFULLY CARES SO MUCH ABOUT THAT THE BULLYING IS NOT PART OF THIS. THE REASON IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD IS BECAUSE I SAID THE CORPORATION NOT ONLY BIG BROTHER, BIG SISTER, BUT THOSE POLICIES ARE BEING CHANGED TO REFLECT WHAT I PUT IN. IN FACT, WITH BIG BROTHERS AND BIG SISTERS, WE DID IT KIND OF TOGETHER IN LINE. AND BACKING UP, WITH ALL RESPECT TO MS. MONICA VERRA-TIRADO. SHALL I SAY IT TEN TIMES? I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW BEFORE YOU, YOU'RE DOING AN AUDIT. I'M VERY MUCH INVOLVED IN WHAT YOU'RE DOING, BUT I THINK WHEN WE SET POLICY, THE CAPTAINS OF THE SHIP RESPECTING, OF COURSE, OUR SUPERINTENDENT, MUST
017BE THE BOARD. WE SET THE TONE. AND WHEN WE PUT WORDS LIKE ZERO TOLERANCE, THAT MEANS AS A BOARD, NOT ONLY PHILOSOPHICALLY, THAT MEANS WE ARE VERY AWARE THAT THIS GROUP NEEDS MORE PROTECTION. NOW, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING LONGER ABOUT THIS BECAUSE MY JOB ONLY IS TO RESPOND TO WHAT I'VE LEARNED AND WHAT I KNOW TO BE TRUE AS EVERY ONE OF YOU WILL DO THE SAME. THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO SAY ON THIS. Melissa Snively: OKAY. THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. Lynn Gray: THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: MEMBER SHAMBURGER. Tamara Shamburger: THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO KIND OF REITERATE SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT ARE ALREADY MADE. I DO AGREE WITH THE INTENT OF THESE CHANGES, OF COURSE. I AM JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE REDUNDANCY OF THE CHANGES. OF COURSE, THE LGBTQ STATUS,
018I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AN ISSUE THAT IT DOESN'T SAY LGBTQA, IF THAT'S AN ISSUE, GOING TO BE AN ISSUE, PARTICULARLY WITH THAT COMMUNITY, IF THAT'S EVEN APPROPRIATE OR LGBTQ+, RIGHT? AND SO I GUESS IF WE DO AGREE THEN, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IS ALL THE WAY ACCURATE. IN TERMS OF THE ZERO TOLERANCE, OF COURSE, THAT IS OUR PHILOSOPHY AS A BOARD. BUT BACK TO REDUNDANCY, IF YOU LOOK AT LINE 14, IT DOES SAY THE BOARD WILL VIGOROUSLY ENFORCE ITS PROHIBITION AGAINST HARASSMENT BASED ON DA-DA-DA. SO IT IS KIND OF ALREADY LAID OUT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT BEING REDUNDANT FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING CONVERSATION. THIS IS A MAGNIFICENT CONVERSATION. THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY, FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. BUT LET'S MAKE SURE THE POLICY IS APPROPRIATE AND NOT DUPLICATIVE
019FOR THE SAKE OF BEING DUPLICATIVE. I DO AGREE WITH MEMBER STUART THAT ALIGNING THIS WITH THE LGBTQ RESOURCE GUIDE IS PROBABLY THE MOST APPROPRIATE WAY TO REALLY HAVE THIS FULL DISCUSSION. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MS. SHAMBURGER. MEMBER CONA. Steve Cona: SORRY. AS I'M GOING THROUGH THE POLICY, THE ONE THING THAT WHEN YOU HAVE DEFINITIONS, WHICH WE HAVEN'T CHANGED, AND THE DEFINITIONS THAT WE HAVE LISTED ARE SEXUAL HARASSMENT, RACE, COLOR, RELIGIOUS, NATIONAL, AND DISABILITY. IF WE'RE GOING TO ADD DEFINITIONS, WE'VE GOT TO -- LET'S DO THE POLICY NOT JUST ADD A LABEL, BUT LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT OTHER DEFINITIONS ARE WE MISSING FROM THE ENTIRE POLICY AS A WHOLE. SO THAT'S JUST ONE OTHER THING. Melissa Snively: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MEMBER STUART. Cindy Stuart: THANK YOU. SO MR. PORTER, I WOULD
020ASK THAT WE HOLD BACK THIS POLICY UNTIL STAFF HAS HAD TIME TO ALIGN IT WITH THEIR RESOURCE GUIDE. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WILL BE CHANGES TO THE RESOURCE GUIDE OR NOT, IF THEY HAD A CHANCE TO BRING THAT GROUP BACK TOGETHER AND LOOK AT THAT. I KNOW THAT'S ONLY BEEN IN THE FIELD FOR A YEAR AND A HALF. SO HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH PRINCIPALS AND STAFF ON SITES, WHETHER OR NOT THERE NEEDS TO BE ADDITIONAL CHANGES OR WHETHER OR NOT THE STUDENT GROUP NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT BACK TOGETHER, BUT I WOULD ASK THAT WE HOLD BACK ON THIS UNTIL WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALIGN IT. THERE'S NO POINT IN US ADVERTISING THIS TWICE AND MAKING CHANGES TWICE. Melissa Snively: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MEMBER STUART. SO I THINK OVERALL, THE BOARD HAS COME TO
021THE CONSENSUS THAT THE INTENT IS GOOD FOR THIS PARTICULAR POLICY CHANGE BUT A LITTLE MORE DEEP DIVE NEEDS TO BE DONE ON MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE ALIGNING IT WITH THE RESOURCE AND MAYBE BRING IT BACK IN THE NEXT POLICY CYCLE. IS THAT THE CONSENSUS I'M HEARING FROM THE BOARD TODAY? OKAY. SO WE'LL GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MS. GRAY. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND PASS THAT ALONG TO MR. DAVIS TO WORK WITH HIS STAFF. THE NEXT POLICY IS THE 2260.03, THE RACIAL EQUITY POLICY. MS. DAVIS, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT BEFORE WE -- OR MR. PORTER. Jim Porter: ANOTHER POLICY INITIATED BY MS. GRAY. AND WE WORKED WITH MONICA TIRADO ON THIS. THE BOARD IS POISED TO DO A SORT OF EQUITY AUDIT, I BELIEVE. SO THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS DRAFTED AGREED TO BY STAFF
022AND MS. GRAY IS FOUND ON LINE 78 AND 79. THE LANGUAGE THAT IS SUGGESTED -- I'LL READ IT. INCREASED REPRESENTATION OF EDUCATORS AND LEADERS AT ALL LEVELS CONSISTENT WITH OUR SCHOOLS, DISTRICT, DEMOGRAPHICS. IF MS. GRAY WANTS TO TALK FURTHER ABOUT WHY SHE WANTED TO BRING THIS FORWARD IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO HEAR FROM HER NOW. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MR. PORTER. I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHY YOU BROUGHT THIS FORWARD BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT FOR MANY MONTHS AND POSSIBLY YEARS AT THIS POINT. I THINK THAT IT'S PRETTY EVIDENT WHY, BUT IF YOU WANTED TO SPEAK FURTHER TOWARDS IT. Lynn Gray: THANKS. YOU KNOW I ALWAYS WANT TO SPEAK. SO, YES, I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE BLACK MEN LEADERSHIP, AS MONICA HAS ALSO. AND WE ALSO ARE VERY COGNIZANT THAT WE HAVE A 17
023TO 18 PERCENT BLACK POPULATION, AND WE ALSO HAVE HISPANIC-WISE, 38%. ALL IN ALL, WE ARE ALSO REMINDED THAT OUR LEADERSHIP SHOULD MATCH THE DEMOGRAPHICS AS ANALOGOUS IS THE CURRICULUM SHOULD MATCH THE DEMOGRAPHICS, WHICH WE ARE BOTH WORKING ON, AND I THINK THE BOARD MEMBERS ARE ALSO DOING THE SAME. SO IN THE SPIRIT OF ALIGNMENT, I BELIEVE THAT IT IS TIME, EVEN THOUGH IT DOES NOT HAVE -- IT HAS JUST A FEW WORDS, AGAIN, IT IS TIME THAT WE LOOK AT THIS POLICY CHANGE AS A WAY OF OWNING UP TO THE ACTUAL FOLKS, THE PEOPLE THAT WE SERVE IN OUR DISTRICT AND HAVE LEADERSHIP REFLECT NOT ONLY THE AFRICAN AMERICAN POPULATION AND THE POPULATION OF COLOR, ALSO THE HISPANIC. THIS HAS COME FROM MONTHS OF WORK WITH FORUMS THAT I'VE BEEN MEETING WITH AND THE BLACK
024MEN LEADERSHIP. ONE OF THEM I THINK SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS, IF YOU REMEMBER, IS A RUNNER WHO CAN OUTRUN YOU, BY THE WAY. HE'S PRINCIPAL AT JUST, KEVIN McDONALD, HE HEADS THIS LEADERSHIP. AND I WANT TO THANK ALSO MS. MONICA FOR DIVING DEEP INTO A VERY, VERY TENUOUS SUBJECT AND ALSO FOR DOING THE AUDIT ON TOP OF IT, WHICH WILL ALSO CONFIRM WHAT I'M STATING NOW. SO THAT'S MY RATIONALE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. SPEAKING OF THE AUDITS, KIND OF IN THE SAME SITUATION AS WE WERE AT THE PREVIOUS POLICY IS DO WE WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE AUDIT IS COMPLETE? I HAVE A FEELING WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS POLICY AND MAKE ADDITIONAL CHANGES TO IT AGAIN. I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, IS THIS URGENT ENOUGH
025THAT WE NEED TO CHANGE IT NOW AND MAKE ANOTHER CHANGE LATER? BUT I GUESS I POSE THAT TO THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS TO SEE WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT THAT. MR. DAVIS, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT YOU WANTED TO MAKE ON THAT? Addison Davis: YES, MA'AM, THROUGH THE CHAIR, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE PHILOSOPHY IN THE STATEMENT. I DO BELIEVE THE EQUITY AUDIT WILL COME BACK AND GIVE US SOME MORE INFORMATION THAT WE CAN POTENTIALLY GROW OR STRENGTHEN THIS PARTICULAR POLICY. AS STATED BEFORE, I'LL TAKE DIRECTION FROM THE WILL OF THE BOARD. BUT THAT INFORMATION WILL BE VERY INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT STEPS -- IT SHOULD IDENTIFY OUR STRENGTHS AS AN ORGANIZATION AND ALSO IDENTIFY OUR AREAS OF OPPORTUNITY. ONCE THE AREAS OF OPPORTUNITY ARE IDENTIFIED, THEN WE CAN GO DEEPER INTO THIS
026BODY OF WORK. WE'VE DONE A REALLY NICE JOB OVER THE LAST SIX MONTHS BEING ABLE TO EXPAND THE OVERALL LEADERSHIP PIPELINE RELATED TO RECRUITMENT TO INDIVIDUALS OF COLOR. AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO SO, IF IT'S A PRIORITY AND SHOULD MIRROR THE DEMOGRAPHICS IN OUR ORGANIZATION. Melissa Snively: IT SHOULD, YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. LET'S HEAR FROM OTHER BOARD MEMBERS THEN. WE'LL GO TO DR. HAHN. THANK YOU, MR. DAVIS. Stacy Hahn: THANK YOU. YOU ARE CORRECT. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR SOME TIME. I KNOW MS. GRAY SAID THIS WAS DONE IN COLLABORATION WITH THE OFFICE OF DIVERSITY. WAS HR INVOLVED AT ALL? IN THIS DISCUSSION, MS. GRAY? SOMEBODY? ANYBODY? SORRY? Melissa Snively: MEMBER GRAY -- Stacy Hahn: I MEAN, JUST TO SEE BECAUSE THIS IS AN EVOLVING. THIS TOUCHES IT. Melissa Snively: I'M GETTING A
027NOD. Stacy Hahn: I WOULD ALSO AGREE WITH MEMBER SNIVELY ABOUT WAITING FOR THE EQUITY AUDIT. I AGREE WITH THE INTENT OF THE STATEMENT, OBVIOUSLY, BUT I WANT TO ALSO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN COMPLY WITH OUR OWN POLICY. I THINK THE EQUITY AUDIT WILL PROVIDE DATA AND INFORMATION THAT WILL ALLOW US TO HAVE A DEEPER DISCUSSION AROUND THE RACIAL EQUITY POLICY AND GOING BACK TO MEMBER STUART'S COMMENTS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVISE THIS POLICY, MAYBE LOOKING AT MORE THAN JUST ADDING ONE SENTENCE, BUT TRULY REVISING IT AND CONNECTING IT ACROSS TO OTHER POLICIES TO STRENGTHEN IT. SO AT THIS TIME, I WOULD SUPPORT WAITING FOR THE EQUITY AUDIT. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, DR. HAHN. MEMBER SHAMBURGER. Tamara Shamburger: THANK YOU. I DO ALSO AGREE THAT WE SHOULD WAIT
028ON THE EQUITY AUDIT BEFORE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS. ONCE AGAIN, I THINK THE INTENT IS REALLY GOOD. I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE PLACEMENT. PARTICULARLY IN THIS POLICY. IF YOU GO BACK TO THE PURPOSE OF THIS POLICY, IF YOU LOOK AT LINE 7 AND 8, THIS POLICY IS ABOUT ELIMINATING SYSTEMIC AND INSTITUTIONAL RACISM IN OUR CLASSROOMS TO ENSURE THAT STUDENTS ARE SUCCEEDING AND HAVE A CHANCE TO ACADEMICALLY SUCCEED. SO WHAT I THINK WE OUGHT TO REALLY LOOK AT, A POLICY THAT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON AND I TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT WITH MS. VERRA-TIRADO ABOUT IT. THESE HARD NAMES. I'M TELLING YOU. I FEEL YOUR PAIN, SUPERINTENDENT. WE REALLY NEED TO -- HOPEFULLY I'LL BRING THAT FORWARD REALLY SOON. IT'S REALLY A BROADER EQUITY POLICY. AN EQUITY POLICY THAT WILL ENCOMPASS NOT ONLY THE RACIAL
029EQUITY POLICY BUT ENCOMPASS EMPLOYMENT EQUITY, FACILITIES EQUITY, ALL TYPE OF EQUITY. A BROADER EQUITY POLICY. WE CAN'T PUT EVERYTHING IN THE RACIAL EQUITY POLICY THAT'S DESIGNED FOR A VERY SPECIFIC THING. AGAIN, MEMBER GRAY, I DEFINITELY LOVE THE INTENT OF THIS. I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE, BUT JUST NOT IN THIS PARTICULAR POLICY AND CERTAINLY NOT AT THIS TIME UNTIL WE HAVE A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE RESULTS OF THE EQUITY AUDIT. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER SHAMBURGER. MEMBER GRAY. Lynn Gray: AND I WILL SAY ALOUD THAT THE WORK THAT MS. MONICA HAS DONE ALONG WITH OUR SUPERINTENDENT, THEY HAVE DONE A LOT OF INTENSE DEEP DIVE IN RESPECT TO REFLECTING OUR DEMOGRAPHICS. AND I AM VERY COGNIZANT AGAIN OF THE AUDIT. AND I TRULY AGREE. IF IT WERE NOT THAT CASE, WHICH WHEN I ORIGINALLY TURNED THIS
030IN, IF IT WERE NOT THAT CASE, I WOULD SAY THAT I'M NOT REALLY GOING TO WANT TO SLEEP ON THIS. SEE, WHEN YOU PUT THINGS FOR LATER, LATER, LATER, THE STUDENTS ARE THE ONES THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE LASER FOCUSED ON, AND EVERY FIVE MINUTES FOR A STUDENT, BE IT BULLYING, HARASSMENT, NOT SHARING, APPRECIATE THEIR CULTURE, THAT IS A MAKE-OR-BREAK MOMENT FOR THAT STUDENT. WE ARE ALL SIGNATURE HERE COMFORTABLY SAYING LET'S WAIT ANOTHER FEW MONTHS FOR ANOTHER POLICY CYCLE, I'M IN THE CLASSROOM LOOKING AT MY STUDENTS, AND I'M SAYING, CAN WE MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO THEIR LIVES NOW? SO WHEN I BRING UP THESE POLICIES, IT'S NOT JUST BECAUSE I'M LOOKING FOR A NEW CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES HERE, I'M LOOKING TO REFLECT THE ABSOLUTE REAL RELEVANT NEEDS NOW. AND I'M
031ASKING THE BOARD TO LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T GET INTO THE CLIQUES THAT WE MIGHT HAVE AND OUR INNER FEELINGS OF, OH, I DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT THIS ONE OR THE OTHER. LET'S MAKE SURE WE ARE INVOLVED WITH OUR KIDS' NEEDS NOW. I'M GOING TO YIELD THE FLOOR, BUT I WILL SAY, SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS AND MS. MONICA, YOU ARE LOOKING INTO THE NEEDS OF OUR STUDENTS NOW. AND I KNOW THAT. SO I TOTALLY WILL VENTURE TO SAY I AGREE WITH THE BOARD. SO THAT'S ALL I WANT TO SAY ON THIS ONE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. MEMBER PEREZ. Karen Perez: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THE AMAZING THING OF PERFORMING AN AUDIT IS THAT YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO SEE ON ALL LEVELS, NOT JUST WHERE IT AFFECTS THE STUDENTS, BUT
032ALSO WHERE IT AFFECTS ANY AREA OF THIS DISTRICT AS FAR AS DIVERSITY IS CONCERNED BECAUSE STUDENTS ARE AFFECTED IN ALL AREAS IN THIS DISTRICT WHEN IT COMES TO EMPLOYEES THAT LOOK LIKE THEM, WHEN IT COMES TO DECISION MAKERS THAT LOOK LIKE THEM. SO WAITING FOR THAT AUDIT IS IMPERATIVE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING FOR DIVERSITY. DIVERSITY MATTERS IN ALL AREAS OF THIS DISTRICT. I AM, TOO, FOR WAITING FOR THE AUDIT. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER PEREZ. I BELIEVE THAT CONCLUDES THE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS. MR. PORTER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHAT THE CONSENSUS WAS AS FAR AS THE AUDIT. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE NEED TO WAIT FOR THE AUDIT. Jim Porter: THAT'S MY SENSE. Melissa Snively: THAT WAS KIND OF MY SENSE, TOO. AGAIN, VERY GOOD INTENTION ON THIS PARTICULAR
033POLICY LANGUAGE. HOPEFULLY WE'LL SOMEHOW GET INTERTWINED WITHIN THE RECOMMENDATIONS ONCE THE EQUITY AUDIT HAS BEEN DONE BY DR. MONICA VERRA-TIRADO. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT SECTION -- EXCUSE ME, NEXT POLICY IS 2430.02, VOLUNTEERS PROPOSED BY BOARD MEMBER STUART. Jim Porter: THIS IS A POLICY BOARD MEMBER STUART PROPOSED AND SHE WORKED WITH MARYLOU WHALEY ON THIS. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THEM TO DISCUSS THE PURPOSE AND WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. Cindy Stuart: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I'LL FRAME THIS UP AND LET THEM BRING FORWARD THE CHANGES THAT ARE A LOT MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN I EXPECTED, ACTUALLY. THIS COMES TO YOU OUT OF A SITUATION, ACTUALLY, THAT HAPPENED AT A SCHOOL. I'M SURE IT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST AND WE HAVE PROBABLY NOT ADDRESSED IT, BUT OUR VOLUNTEERS TAKE ACTION AND ARE PART OF THE
034SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT AND FAMILY A LOT MORE THAN I THINK WE WANT TO BELIEVE OR KNOW ABOUT. WE HAD A SITUATION WHERE I WAS TOLD LATER BY ADMINISTRATION AND BY OTHER VOLUNTEER PARENTS THAT THIS IS SOMETHING -- THE INCIDENT THAT HAPPENED IS SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN REPORTED BY A PARENT AND WASN'T. AND SO THAT BRINGS ME GRAVE CONCERN, AND I WANT TO JUST -- I TALKED TO MS. WHALEY AND MR. AYRES ABOUT THIS, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT OUR VOLUNTEERS UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE -- WHEN THEY STEP ONTO OUR CAMPUSES AND THEY GO ON FIELD TRIPS AND OVERNIGHTS, THEY HAVE TO BE AS IF THEY ARE AN EMPLOYEE. THEY ARE NOT AN EMPLOYEE BUT THEY HAVE TO ACT AND BEHAVE AS IF THEY ARE AN EMPLOYEE. THEY HAVE TO REPORT SUSPECTED
035ABUSE. THEY HAVE TO REPORT SUSPICIOUS THINGS THEY SEE, HEAR, OR FIND, THAT THEY ARE TAKING ON THE ROLE AS IF THEY ARE NOT JUST A PARENT AND NOT JUST A VOLUNTEER. THIS KIND OF BROADENS THE VOLUNTEER EXPANSION SO THAT WE MAKE SURE OUR VOLUNTEERS ARE TRAINED IN A MANNER IN WHICH THEY KNOW THE RESPONSIBILITY THEY ARE TAKING ON IF THEY STEP INTO THAT ROLE. THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE TO REPORT THOSE THINGS EITHER TO AN ADMINISTRATOR OR LAW ENFORCEMENT. THIS WAS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT SITUATION THAT HAPPENED, AND IT JUST REALLY HURT MY HEART TO KNOW THAT A PARENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STOP OR GET IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS SITUATION. I DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING HAS BEEN FOUNDED ALONG THOSE LINES, BUT PARENTS NEED TO UNDERSTAND THEIR ROLE AS VOLUNTEERS WHEN THEY STEP IN AND DECIDE
036THAT THEY ARE GOING TO GET BACKGROUND CHECKED AND GET FINGERPRINTED AND GO ON THESE TRIPS AND BECOME PSEUDOSTAFF OR PARENTS TO THE CHILDREN THAT THEY ARE OVERSEEING. I'LL LET MS. WHALEY GO THROUGH THE CHANGES THAT I'M SURE SHE AND HER STAFF HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD. IT'S IN MULTIPLE POLICIES AS WELL. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER STUART. WELCOME, MS. WHALEY. MaryLou Whaley: [INAUDIBLE] [MICROPHONE NOT ON] [NO SOUND FROM MICROPHONE] WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE POLICY CHANGES, THERE'S A LOT OF RED WHICH MEANS ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE. IT REALLY CAPTURES THE -- NECESSITATES THE NEED TO SPELL THINGS OUT MORE CLEARLY. WE USE OUR HIRING GUIDELINES TO DETERMINE OUR VOLUNTEERS, CAPABILITIES OR ACCESS TO WORK IN OUR SCHOOLS. STATUTE SAYS THAT VOLUNTEERS ARE UNPAID EMPLOYEES. WE'RE ACTUALLY AUDITED BY THE AUDITOR GENERAL UNDER THOSE TERMS. THIS JUST OUTLINES IT MUCH
037MORE SPECIFICALLY. GIVING CREDIT TO BACKGROUND CHECKS MUCH MORE CLEARLY AND QUICKLY THROUGH OUR SAFE VISITOR CHANGES. IT ALIGNS VERY WELL TO THE CHANGES THAT WE'RE SEEING IN OUR DISTRICT. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS. WHALEY. MY FIRST QUESTION IS, DOES THIS ALREADY ALIGN WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING CURRENTLY OR IS IT GOING TO CREATE MORE PROCEDURES? AND IF SO, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AS FAR AS PROCESS AND PROCEDURE GOES? Addison Davis: YES, MA'AM, THROUGH THE CHAIR. IT ALIGNS, SPEAK TO NEXT STEPS. MaryLou Whaley: ABSOLUTELY. IT DOES ALIGN DIRECTLY TO THE WORK WE DO IN PROCEDURES. WE'VE HAD A VERY ROBUST VOLUNTEER PROCESS FOR SEVERAL YEARS WHEN WE USED TO DO IT IN-HOUSE, MEANING APPLICATION AND BACKGROUND CHECKS. THIS EMULATES WHAT WE DO CURRENTLY AND IT IS BASED ON STATUTE. WE'VE
038HAD VERY HIGH REVIEWS WHEN THE AUDITOR COMES THROUGH AND LOOKS AT THE EVIDENCE THAT WE PROVIDE. WE DO HAVE WITHIN THE SAFE VISITOR CONTEXT OF THE NEW REGISTRATION, THEY CALL IT REGISTRATION OR APPLICATION, WE IDENTIFY THE NEED TO MANDATE A REPORTER AND ALSO REPORT INCIDENTS. THOSE THINGS ARE ABSOLUTELY EMBEDDED IN THE ACTUAL APPLICATION AS WELL AS ASSURANCES THEY AGREE TO DO WHEN THEY BECOME VOLUNTEERS AND IT'S EMBEDDED IN OUR TRAININGS AS WELL. Melissa Snively: OKAY. THIS IS REALLY POLICY CATCHING UP WITH WHAT WE ALREADY -- MaryLou Whaley: I WOULD AGREE. YES, MA'AM. THAT IS A GREAT WAY TO DETERMINE WHY WE'VE MADE THE CHANGES. A LOT OF THIS CAME THROUGH LAW ENFORCEMENT AND NOT THE EDUCATION, THE FDOE. SO WHEN THE AUDITOR GENERAL CAME, STOPPED ON BY A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, THEY RECOGNIZED THAT
039WE WOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN OF THIS POLICY CHANGE OR THE STATUTE CHANGE BECAUSE IT HAPPENED OUTSIDE OF EDUCATION. BUT IT IS HOW IT INTERACTS WITH THE COMMUNITY. Melissa Snively: GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. NEXT WE HAVE MEMBER GRAY. Lynn Gray: WELL, -- AND WE ALL APPRECIATE THAT SAFETY IS FIRST AND FOREMOST. YOU KNOW, I SERVE -- THAT'S WHAT WE USED TO HAVE IN THE NEW SYSTEM AND SO HAVE THE BOARD MEMBERS. SO WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH VOLUNTEERS. AS MEMBER SNIVELY MENTIONED, WE'RE DOING A LOT OF THIS NOW, BUT IT WAS NOT IN POLICY. MY ONLY CONCERN, IF THERE'S ANY, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU CAN EVER BE AS SAFE -- I MEAN, SAFETY JUST IS ALWAYS THE MOST PARAMOUNT RESPONSIBILITY OF OUR BOARD. TO ME, THERE'S NO WRONG ANSWERS. BUT WITH CONSIDERATION TO OUR SUPERINTENDENT, I
040JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE AND, SUPERINTENDENT, IF YOU'LL SPEAK TO THIS, NOT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT IS THIS OKAY BECAUSE WHAT WE PUT IN POLICY YOU WOULD HAVE TO ADHERE TO. IT IS VERY MUCH A PROCEDURAL POLICY, AND WE'RE REMINDED THAT WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE POLICY, NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PROCEDURAL, RIGHT? I DON'T WANT TO GET IN THE WEEDS, BECAUSE, AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PRIORITY OF SAFETY, WHICH IS TO ME THE BIGGEST THING. BUT WHAT -- WAS THERE ANY CAUTIONARY REMARKS OR ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD SAY WITH THIS BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO THIS? Addison Davis: YES, MA'AM, THROUGH THE CHAIR, I BELIEVE THIS IS A MUST. I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD BE MAKING CERTAIN THAT WE FILTER THROUGH ANY BACKGROUND CHECKS. WE ARE MAKING CERTAIN THAT ANYONE THAT INTERACTS WITH OUR
041CHILDREN, OUR ADULTS, ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AT THE STATEMENT LEVEL AS -- SAME LEVEL AS IF THEY WERE ONE OF OUR EMPLOYEES. THIS IS MAKING CERTAIN THAT OUR TRAINING, WHEN WE ENGAGE WITH OUR VOLUNTEERS, THEY TRULY UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT OUR POLICY. WE INTRODUCE THAT. WE MAKE CERTAIN THAT WE CONTINUE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS AND THEN TIE THEM TO PARTICULAR EMPLOYEES SO THEY CAN GO DEEPER IF THEY EVER SEE AN UNDESIRED BEHAVIOR EXPOSED TO OR IDENTIFY ANY PARTICULAR TRAUMA THAT MAY BE ENGAGED FOR ONE OF OUR LEARNERS. I THINK IT DEFINITELY ALIGNS WITH BEST PRACTICE. AND WE ALREADY OVERLY ARE DOING MOST OF THIS AS WELL. Lynn Gray: THANK YOU. WELL, THEN THAT SETTLES MY OPINION ON THAT. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. MEMBER SHAMBURGER. Tamara Shamburger: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MS. WHALEY, SO I
042HAVE A QUESTION. I HOPE I'M NOT, LIKE, JUMPING THE GUN. I KNOW THIS IS A PUBLIC CONVERSATION. I REALLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT I LIKE TO CALL AND THE WORK DEBRA BLOSSOM IS DOING AROUND WHAT I LIKE TO CALL THE SECOND-CHANCE REVIEWS. ONE, I KIND OF WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT AND IF MEMBER STUART IS AGREEABLE, I WOULD LIKE TO POSSIBLY AMEND THE POLICY TO INCLUDE IT, THE WORK WE'RE DOING AROUND GIVING CERTAIN FOLKS A SECOND CHANCE. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, MR. SUPERINTENDENT, ESPECIALLY TO MY DISTRICT WHERE FOLKS MAY HAVE HAD INDISCRETION DECADES AGO, NOTHING THAT IMPACTS CHILDREN, NOTHING THAT WOULD TECHNICALLY BE OF A CONCERN BUT THEY ARE STILL BARRED BY THIS POLICY. AS WE TALK ABOUT LIFTING AND SHIFTING THE WORK IN DISTRICT FIVE AND WANTING MORE PARENTAL ENGAGEMENT
043WE CAN'T SAY THAT WITH OUR MOUTHS BUT THEN HAVE A POLICY THAT KEEPS THEM OUT. I'M EXCITED -- THE SECOND CHANCE REVIEW THAT WILL ALLOW CERTAIN CANDIDATES TO BE LOOKED IT THE WITH A MORE FINE TOOTH COMB OR WITH A MAGNIFYING GLASS TO SEE IF THEY ACTUALLY QUALIFY. THERE ARE A FEW PARTICULAR CASES THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE NEWS THAT REALLY KIND OF BRINGS THIS TO MIND. ONE, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY ADD TO THIS POLICY OR SHOULD IT JUST BE LOOKED IN PROCESS OR CAN WE ADD A LINE FOR POLICY? Addison Davis: I CAN START. YOU CAN GO AHEAD. MaryLou Whaley: WE TALK ABOUT RESTORATIVE PARENT INVOLVEMENT, RESTORATIVE PRACTICES. THE NOTION IS THAT THERE ARE TIMES WHEN BACKGROUND, CRIMINAL BACKGROUND DOESN'T ALLOW SOMEBODY TO MOVE BEYOND SOMETHING THAT'S HAPPENED A LONG, LONG
044TIME AGO IN PRACTICE. SO WE DO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RE-REVIEW, AND WE OFTEN DO. WE HAVE A HANDFUL OF PEOPLE THAT WE REVIEW ON A SECONDARY AND NOW THIRD CHOICE OR CHANCE WHEN THERE IS AN INTEREST IN A PARENT TO COME BACK AROUND AND COMPLY WITH THOSE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS, WHICH WOULD BE REFERENCES, THE REASON WHY -- OR THE COMPELLING WHY THEY WANT TO BE INVOLVED. AND WE KNOW OF A COUPLE OF VERY HIGHLIGHTED CASES WHERE THE CRIMINAL CHARGE WAS WHEN SOMEBODY WAS A MINOR, BUT HAD TO DO WITH WEAPONS AND SOME OTHER THINGS WHICH REALLY DID NOT ALLOW THEM TO VOLUNTEER. NOW, IT DOESN'T KEEP THEM FROM PARENTING AND PARENTING AND ATTENDING CONFERENCES AND BEING PART OF A RECITAL OR THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT THERE IS EAGERNESS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RESTORATIVE PRACTICES.
045I'M SURE, SUPERINTENDENT, WHEN WE HAVE THE CONVERSATIONS AND THERE IS A PROCESS FOR THAT. I WOULD ENCOURAGE PERHAPS TO BE IN A PROCEDURAL WAY RATHER THAN POLICY BECAUSE IT DOES TAKE THAT EXTRA CONVERSATION AROUND IT. Addison Davis: EM YES, MA'AM, THROUGH THE CHAIR, I AGREE. IT IS TOUCHY. WE HAVE A HIGH STANDARD FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE GOING TO INTERACT AND BE AROUND OUR STUDENTS EVERY SINGLE DAY AND OUR EMPLOYEES, BUT WE DEFINITELY CAN LOOK AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A CRITERIA AND CONTINUE TO REVIEW CASE-BY-CASE BASIS IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT AN INDIVIDUAL WILL HAVE THAT SECOND CHANCE TO TRANSITION TO OUR HALLWAYS. OPEN TO THE CONVERSATION, AND I KNOW THAT WHEN I FIRST CAME IN, THERE WERE SOME INITIAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT INDIVIDUALS TRYING TO TRANSITION BACK IN. WE APPRECIATE THEIR
046HEART AND WILLINGNESS TO DO SO, BUT WE HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHATEVER MEASURES WE DO TAKE. Tamara Shamburger: I APOLOGIZE, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU FOR THAT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEN YOU AGREE, SUPERINTENDENT, THAT'S REALLY MORE OF A PROCEDURE AND A PROCESS MORE THAN IT IS A POLICY AMENDMENT, RIGHT? Addison Davis: YES, MA'AM. Tamara Shamburger: THANK YOU SO MUCH. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER SHAMBURGER. MEMBER STUART. Cindy Stuart: THANK YOU. IF IT HELPS, MEMBER SHAMBURGER, I AM COMPLETELY IN FAVOR OF THE SECOND CHANCE REVIEW. IF IT HELPS TO ADD A LINE THAT SAYS THAT THERE IS A SECOND CHANCE REVIEW OPPORTUNITY THAT IS OVERSEEN BY THE SUPERINTENDENT'S OFFICE SPECIFICALLY, I WOULD BE FINE TO ADD THAT LANGUAGE. I KNOW THAT PROCEDURALLY SECOND CHANCE REVIEW WOULD STAY AS PROCEDURAL, BUT IF WE WANT TO
047ADD THAT LANGUAGE SO VOLUNTEERS KNOW WHEN THEY LOOK AT THE POLICY, THAT OPPORTUNITY IS THERE, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHERE ELSE IT'S STATED THAT IS AN OPPORTUNITY, UNLESS YOU WENT THROUGH THE SCHOOL AND I DON'T KNOW -- I HATE TO SAY THIS OUT LOUD -- MANY ADMINISTRATORS WHO ARE READING OUR POLICY WHO WOULD EVEN KNOW OF THAT OPPORTUNITY. UNLESS SOMEBODY GOT TO A BOARD MEMBER OR MS. WHALEY OR THE SUPERINTENDENT, THEY MAY NOT KNOW. IF WE WANTED TO SAY ON ONE OF THESE LINES THAT THERE IS A SECOND-CHANCE REVIEW OPPORTUNITY FOR SPECIFIC CASES THROUGH THE SUPERINTENDENT FOR HIS APPROVAL, THEN I WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT. Jim Porter: BOARD MEMBERS, IF I MAY, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE BOARD'S INTENT AND THE SUPERINTENDENT'S INTENT. THIS POLICY HAS BEEN HEAVILY VETTED AND WORKED ON. I WOULD
048HESITATE TO MAKE A SNAP JUDGMENT AT THE DAIS. I UNDERSTAND MS. SHAMBURGER'S INTENT AND THE SUPERINTENDENT'S EXPLANATION. WHAT I WOULD ASK IS IF YOU COULD LET US REVIEW THIS BETWEEN NOW AND THE TIME IT'S ADVERTISED FOR PUBLIC HEARING, WE'LL HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT MORE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. Melissa Snively: VERY GOOD. ARE WE GOOD WITH THAT? VERY GOOD. ANOTHER COMMENT -- MS. STUART, WERE YOU FINISHED? OKAY. MR. CONA. Steve Cona: JUST TO ADD -- AND I DON'T WANT TO ADD TO THE COMPLEXITY OF THE GREAT PEOPLE WHO VOLUNTEER IN OUR DISTRICT, BUT I WILL SAY, WE HAVE TONS OF MEN AND WOMEN OUT THERE WHO CAN'T WORK ON OUR SCHOOL PROJECTS BECAUSE OF THE JESSICA LUNSFORD ACT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE WHO CAN'T EARN A LIVING
049WORKING IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BECAUSE OF THIS. I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY MINDFUL. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO COMMITTED PETIT CRIMES TEN YEARS AGO THAT CAN'T FIX AN AIR CONDITIONING IN OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT. WHILE WE CONTINUE TO MAKE STRIDES -- THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF THINGS OUT THERE THAT WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF. THAT'S ONE OF THEM BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE MOST HARMFUL IS THAT WE CAN'T HAVE PEOPLE HAVE SECOND CHANCES WORK IN OUR SCHOOLS. THAT'S DIFFICULT FOR ME. SO WHAT WE DO FOR VOLUNTEERS IS ONE THING, BUT WE HAVE A WHOLE WORKFORCE OUT THERE THAT CAN'T WORK ON OUR SCHOOLS. AND WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT. THAT'S STATE LAW, AND THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE MIGHT NEED TO TALK TO AND CREATE SOME SORT OF AGENDA ITEM FOR TALLAHASSEE
050AS WELL. THAT'S ONE THING I WANTED TO RAISE. Melissa Snively: ALL GOOD POINTS. MEMBER GRAY. Lynn Gray: I JUST REALLY ENJOYED MEMBER CONA'S STATEMENT. YOU KNOW, THE IMPORTANCE OF VOLUNTEERS IN OUR SCHOOL HAS ALWAYS BEEN PART OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE EVER SINCE I'VE BEEN TEACHING, AND THAT WAS STARTING 1976. I DON'T KNOW WHAT I WOULD DO WITHOUT VOLUNTEERS TO HELP WITH READING, WITH MATH. THOSE FOLKS, THEY ARE HUGE. SO ANY LANGUAGE THAT WOULD DISCOURAGE VOLUNTEERISM I WOULD HAVE SAID, MS. WHALEY, THAT I AM NOT FOR IT. I FIND THAT THIS LANGUAGE IS VERY CRITICAL THAT WE HAVE NOW BECAUSE IT DOES ENSURE SAFETY. MEMBER CONA, THAT WOULD BE A VERY WISE -- LET'S SAY VERY WISE MOVEMENT TO SHARE WITH OUR LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, NOW THAT WE DON'T HAVE A COMMITTEE. BUT STILL, WE NEED TO MAKE
051SURE VOLUNTEERISM IS A GREAT WAY TO COME TO OUR CHILDREN AND OUR SCHOOLS. THE BIGGEST COMPLAINT OUR PRINCIPALS HAVE IS ALL THE BARRIERS OF GETTING VOLUNTEERS TO BE IN THE SCHOOLS. I'M ONE OF THEM. MEMBER SNIVELY, I WANT TO READ TO MY GRANDKIDS ONCE A WEEK, AND I'M CONSIDERED A VOLUNTEER. I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT TO BE EASY TO DO, BUT IT'S NOT. AT ANY RATE, I'M BEING VERY TALKATIVE RIGHT NOW. I JUST WANTED TO SAY, MEMBER CONA, THANK YOU FOR THOSE SENTIMENTS YOU SHARED. THAT'S IMPORTANT. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. I THINK THAT CONCLUDES COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE. WE LOOK FORWARD TO DISCUSSING THIS AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, WHATEVER CHANGES ARE MADE TO IT BEFORE IT COMES BACK TO US. MS. DAVIS. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. IF IT PLEASES THE BOARD AND
052THE CHAIR, IF MS. WHALEY CAN ALSO REVIEW TWO ADDITIONAL POLICIES ON THE SAME SUBJECT OF VOLUNTEERS, 8442 AND 8462. IT'S THE SAME TOPIC. IF NOT, WE CAN CONTINUE ON WITH THE -- I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE EASY TO PULL THOSE TOGETHER. THEY ARE RELATED TO JUST ADDING A STATEMENT, THE WORD "VOLUNTEER" TO THE POLICY. SO IT'S IN THE SAME CONVERSATION. IF IT PLEASES THE BOARD. Melissa Snively: "IF IT PLEASES THE BOARD,." THANK YOU. PLEASE APPROACH THE BENCH. I'M JUST KIDDING. MAYBE I MISSED MY CALLING. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ALONG, THEN. MOVING ALONG TO 6320, WHICH IS ACTUALLY PROPOSED FROM THE MS. SAUNDERS IN THE BUSINESS DIVISION. ARE WE READY FOR THAT ONE? MS. SAUNDERS. Gretchen Saunders: WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO STRENGTHEN OUR PROCUREMENT POLICY WITH THESE UPDATES. WHAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU IN
053THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, WHAT WE'VE DONE IS UPDATED THE VERBIAGE FROM SUPPLIES, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, AND -- AND THEN JUST UPDATED IT WITH COMMODITIES AND CONTRACTUAL SERVICES OR GOODS AND SERVICES. WE ALSO DEFINED FOR EASE THE TERM "SUPERINTENDENT" TO INCLUDE THE SUPERINTENDENT OR DESIGNEE. THE NEXT PARAGRAPH, WHAT WE'VE DONE IS EXPANDED THE SCOPE TO INCLUDE THE SUPERINTENDENT HAS HAD APPROVAL UP TO $10,000 FOR A CONTRACT OF GOODS AND SERVICES. ANYTHING OVER $10,000 HAS TO COME TO YOU ALL IN A BOARD MEETING. SO WHAT WE DID IS WE LOOKED AT 6A, THE FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 6A, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, I'M SORRY, AND WITH 6A, IT SETS THE MAXIMUM LIMIT AT $50,000 OR WITH BOARD APPROVAL WE CAN GO HIGHER. SO THE SUPERINTENDENT ASKED US TO POLL A COUPLE OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS. WE DID 8 IN THE STATE OF
054FLORIDA AND WE POLLED 6 OUTSIDE OF FLORIDA. THE MAJORITY OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE AT THE $50,000 THRESHOLD ALL THE WAY UP TO $250,000 THRESHOLD. SO WE ON LINE 13 INCREASED OURS TO NO GREATER THAN 50,000 OR THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT ESTABLISHED FOR PURCHASE IN THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. AGAIN, 6A DOES ALLOW THE SCHOOL BOARD TO INCREASE IT OVER TO THE 50,000 THRESHOLD. IF YOU WANT, LOOK AT LINE 16 THROUGH 19, THAT REALLY DEFINES WHO THE SUPERINTENDENT DEEMS HIS DESIGNEE. SO THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT, CHIEF OF STAFF, CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER, GENERAL MANAGER OF PROCUREMENT. AS YOU MOVE FORWARD, WE HAVE CONDENSED LINES 21 THROUGH 26, AND HAVE TAKEN OUT DEPARTMENT HEADS AND SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, UPDATED IT SO IF ANYTHING IS PRINCIPAL AT A SCHOOL SITE OR ADMINISTRATIVE SITE WILL PURCHASE ANYTHING UNDER $5,000, AS LONG AS THEY MEET
055THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND THE THRESHOLDS FOR PROCUREMENT AND THEY WORK WITH PROCUREMENT. WITH THE UPDATE TO $50,000, THAT WOULD TAKE OUT LINES 28 THROUGH 31. THAT WOULD REPLACE THAT SECTION. WE WANTED TO UPDATE LINES 39 TO INCLUDE ANYTHING NOT JUST PURCHASE ORDERS, BUT THE USE OF PROCUREMENT CARDS OR THE P-CARD AS WE CALL IT. SO WE WERE LIMITING OURSELVES JUST AS A PURCHASE ORDER, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT EVERYTHING, THE DOCUMENTS RELEASED ON THE STREETS, WE ALWAYS REFERENCE THE P CARD OR PURCHASING CARD. ON THE NEXT PAGE, WE TOOK OUT THE REFERENCE ON LINE 60 TO PAREN 6 TO INCLUDE ALL OF THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 6A. AGAIN, ON LINE 64 THROUGH 69, WE INCLUDED LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUTHORIZED FEDERAL GENERAL SERVICES CONTRACTS OR A PIGGYBACK, WHICH IS WHAT THAT MEANS. LINES 70 THROUGH 73,
056WE INCLUDED COMPETITIVE SOLICITATION AND TOOK OUT THE WORD "BIDS." UNDER LINES 81 THROUGH 88, WE BROUGHT THIS MORE IN LINE WITH BEST POLICY. IF WE HAVE A BID PROTEST, IT'S EITHER $5,000 OR 3% OF THE ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE CONTRACT. THE FORMULA THAT WE WERE USING BEFORE, WHICH WAS FINE AT ITS TIME, IT WAS JUST TOO CONVOLUTED. WE ADDED 5,000 OR 3%, WHICHEVER IS GREATER OF THE ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE CONTRACT. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MS. SAUNDERS. I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION BACK ON LINE 14 WITH REFERENCING THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. Gretchen Saunders: YES, MA'AM. Melissa Snively: WHAT IS THE CURRENT MAXIMUM AMOUNT ESTABLISHED FOR PURCHASE IN THAT CODE? Gretchen Saunders: 50,000. UNLESS THE BOARD APPROVES A HIGHER AMOUNT. Melissa Snively: OKAY. THANK YOU. Gretchen Saunders: YOU'RE WELCOME. Melissa Snively: WE'LL GO ON TO
057MS. STUART. Cindy Stuart: JUST CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THE BOARD CAN GIVE EMERGENCY POWERS TO THE SUPERINTENDENT TO MOVE PAST THIS POLICY, CORRECT? Gretchen Saunders: YES. Cindy Stuart: MY OTHER QUESTION IS, SO WHERE IN THIS POLICY AROUND PROCUREMENT, BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES AROUND THIS. AS YOU WELL KNOW, WE'VE HAD ISSUES -- I WON'T GO INTO THE DETAILS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMEWHERE IN THE BIDDING AND BID CONVERSATION -- AND MR. PORTER, MAYBE YOU CAN HELP WITH THE WORDING -- AROUND THE ACTUAL PROCESS JUST SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR. IF A VENDOR LOOKS AT THIS POLICY, IT'S VERY VAGUE. IT'S NOT VERY DEFINED AS TO THE HOW, WHEN, WHAT, WHY, AND WHERE THEY DO BIDDING, AND THAT'S ALL, IN MY OPINION, IS HIDDEN FROM THE BOARD PRESENTLY AND THE PUBLIC BECAUSE
058IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE PUBLIC ACTUALLY SEES. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SOMEWHERE TO SEE LANGUAGE ADDED SOMEWHERE IN THE BIDDING SECTION WHERE YOU PUT PRESENTATIONS WILL BE MADE. DOCUMENTS WILL BE SUBMITTED, WHAT THOSE DOCUMENTS CONSIST OF. THE RANKING ORDER. WHAT I'M FEELING LIKE IS THE PROCUREMENT POLICY THAT RESTS IN OPERATIONS AND IN CONSTRUCTION IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM THIS. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME OF THAT VERBIAGE BROUGHT INTO THIS POLICY SO THAT WE'RE CONSISTENT. OUR CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS BIDDING SHOULD NOT BE ANY DIFFERENT THAN THIS BIDDING, AT LEAST IN THE LANGUAGE THAT COMES FORWARD. SO MR. PORTER, I SEE YOU. Jim Porter: MADAM CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS, IF I MAY INTERJECT AT THIS POINT, MR. CONA HAD ALSO EXPRESSED SIMILAR CONCERNS ABOUT PROCUREMENT. THEY REALLY ARE PROCEDURAL ISSUES AS OPPOSED TO POLICY BUT
059I THINK THE BOARD HAS AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE. THEY DON'T BELONG IN POLICY, MS. STUART. BUT I THINK YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND SORT OF HOW IT'S DONE AND IF THERE ARE CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. SO I THINK -- I COMPLETELY CONCUR WITH YOUR SENTIMENT, MR. CONA'S SENTIMENT, AND WE COULD ADD GENERAL LANGUAGE TO THE POLICY BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT NOT GETTING INTO TOO MANY PROCEDURAL ASPECTS OF THE POLICY BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT. I HEARD IT FROM SEVERAL BOARD MEMBERS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S IN A WORKSHOP SETTING OR ANOTHER TYPE OF REVIEW, BUT WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT NOT HAVING THE POLICY BE TOO HEAVILY LOADED WITH
060PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS. Cindy Stuart: I COMPLETELY RESPECT THAT AND DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU. MY PROBLEM IS AS AN OUTSIDER LOOKING IN FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC'S PERSPECTIVE, THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT OUR PROCUREMENT POLICY CONSISTS OF NOR DO THEY HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THE PROCEDURES CONSIST OF. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THOSE ARE NOT LISTED ANYWHERE THAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC, UNLESS YOU'RE A VENDOR, UNLESS YOU'RE A VENDOR WITH THIS DISTRICT, CAN GET TO. THAT CREATES ISSUES AND CREATING ISSUES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT NOW AROUND SPECIFIC PURCHASES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY THIS DISTRICT FOR THE HOW AND THE WHY AND THE AUTHORITY OF THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THE AUTHORITY OF THIS BOARD. I'M STRUGGLING WITH THAT BECAUSE WE'RE AT AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE CHANGES TO THIS POLICY. AND I DON'T -- AGAIN, I DON'T WANT ALL THE PROCEDURE THERE. I
061THINK THERE HAS TO BE MEAT HOW WE GET TO THE PLACE OF PURCHASING AN ITEM THAT MAY NOT COME BEFORE THIS BOARD OR MAY COME BEFORE THIS BOARD OR I ASKED IT LAST WEEK AT THE BOARD MEETING, WHY DIDN'T THAT GO TO RFP? THOSE SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS ABOUT THE HOW AND THE WHY, I HAVE THE DOCUMENTATION FROM MS. SAUNDERS. I CAN GET AHOLD OF IT. BUT THE GENERAL PUBLIC DOESN'T HAVE THAT. I THINK IF THIS IS OUR FORWARD-FACING DOCUMENT THAT THE PUBLIC GOES TO TO SEARCH FOR THE HOW AND THE WHY WE DO THINGS AND THE PROCEDURE BEHIND SOME OF THE STUFF THAT WE DO, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE PUT SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: I KNOW MR. CONA WAS GOING TO SPEAK TO MR. PORTER'S COMMENTS. DID YOU WANT TO
062WAIT YOUR TURN? OKAY. BUT THEN BACK TO MR. DAVIS, WITH REGARD TO WHAT MS. STUART WAS SAYING, DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND WITH MAYBE WAYS THAT WE CAN BETTER COMMUNICATE WITH THE PUBLIC WITH REGARD TO PROCUREMENT. MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN PUT ON OUR WEBSITE THAT'S CLEAR. Addison Davis: THROUGH THE CHAIR, I DON'T DISAGREE. EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE IN LINE. THAT IS THE BIGGEST THING COMING IN, THERE WERE INCONSISTENCIES WITH PROCUREMENT RELATED TO HOW ONE DIVISION IMPLEMENTED AND RULES AND REGULATIONS THEY FOLLOW VERSUS ANOTHER. THE BIGGEST THING IS GETTING THEM BACK TO WHERE THEY ARE IN UNISON AND MAKE SENSE. I THINK OPENLY WE CAN PUT THAT ON OUR WEBSITE UNDER BUSINESS AFFAIRS, UNDER PROCUREMENT SO THAT EVERYONE CAN BE ABLE TO SEE OUR PROCEDURES REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S OPERATIONS RELATED OR JUST INSTRUCTION RELATED,
063WHATEVER IT MAY BE SO THEY CAN TRULY HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT OUR PROCEDURES ARE. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU. THAT WILL HELP KEEP PROCEDURES OUT OF THE POLICY BUT STILL COMMUNICATE WITH TRANSPARENCY TO THE PUBLIC. MS. STUART, DID YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO MS. GRAY. Lynn Gray: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. SO I'M LOOKING THROUGH IT AND JUST A FEW REMARKS. SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS AND MS. SAUNDERS. NUMBER 13, WHEN WE INVOLVE THE EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS, PUBLIC FUNDS ARE DEFINITELY OUR TAXPAYERS, I DEFINITELY LIKE THE FACT THAT NO GREATER THAN 50,000 BECAUSE, AS I REMINDED MR. FARKAS WHEN WE DO VENDORS, IF WE DON'T START LIMITING THE AMOUNT AND CHECKING IT, WE CAN GET LOST AND A LOT OF MONEY SPENT WITHOUT THE REVENUES COMING IN. SO I
064LOVE THE REMOVAL OF TEMPTATION OF MORE BUT RATHER GOING LESS. I THANK YOU FOR THAT. THE OTHER LINE, LINE NUMBER 67, THE BOARD -- AND 68 -- THE BOARD IS NOT REQUIRED TO REQUEST BIDS FOR PURPOSES MADE FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUTHORIZED FEDERAL GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS. SO WHAT I GET FROM THIS -- AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG -- IS THAT THIS IS A GREAT AVENUE NOW FOR MORE OF OUR DIVERSITY VENDORS TO ENTER. IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S MORE COMPETITIVE. WE ARE ALLOWING MORE COMPETITION. IF I'M INTERPRETING THAT RIGHT, I THINK THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT POINT. IS THAT CORRECT, MS. SAUNDERS? Gretchen Saunders: YES, MA'AM. Lynn Gray: THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. GOOD. THE OTHER ONE, THE LAST -- TWO MORE THINGS -- NUMBER 83, LINE NUMBER 83, WHERE IT SAYS 5,000 OR PERCENT OF THE
065ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE CONTRACT, WHICHEVER IS GREATER, AGAIN, YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT WE ARE BEING MUCH MORE FISCAL RESPONSIVE BECAUSE WE DARN WELL ARE GOING TO CHARGE THE MONEY IF THEY ARE NOT, IF THE VENDORS ARE NOT, WE ARE. SO GOOD THAT YOU PUT THAT IN THERE. THANK YOU. LAST, THE CONE OF SILENCE. THE ONLY THING -- I'LL ASK SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS ABOUT THIS, WE -- AND MS. SAUNDERS AND I GO ROUND AND ROUND -- ACTUALLY, WE DON'T GO ROUND AND ROUND. I HAVE MY OWN METHOD. BUT -- AND MR. PORTER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO CHIME IN. BUT WHEN WE GET INTO LINE 104 TO 109, WITH REGARDS TO ENTERTAINING, SAY, A VENDOR, WHICH I'M SURE BOARD MEMBERS GET THEM ALL THE TIME, MY OWN -- MY PROCEDURE IS I JUST SEND IT TO
066MS. SAUNDERS. BUT I WONDER IF THERE IS ANY OTHER PROCEDURE OR DO EACH BOARD MEMBER DO WHATEVER THEY WANT WITH THE VENDORS OR SHOULD WE HAVE A PROCEDURE SO WE DON'T GET CAUGHT IN THAT GRAY AREA OF ENTERTAINING A VENDOR WHEN WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO? I THINK MR. PORTER IS GOING TO STRAIGHTEN THIS OUT. Jim Porter: IT'S NOT A GRAY AREA AT ALL. NO PUN INTENDED, MS. GRAY, NOT GRAY. IT'S A BLACK-AND-WHITE AREA. BOARD MEMBERS MAY NOT -- IF YOU LOOK AT LINES -- THE LINES YOU JUST REPRESENTED, THE WORD "PROHIBITED" IS USED. ONCE THE CONE OF SILENCE IS IN PLACE, ONLY CERTAIN -- ONLY THE PROCUREMENT TEAM ARE ALLOWED TO TALK TO THE VENDOR. IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS CANNOT DO. Lynn Gray: WHAT ABOUT BEFORE IT GETS TO THE CONE OF SILENCE?
067Jim Porter: THERE'S NO LEGAL PROHIBITION ON THAT. Lynn Gray: OKAY. SO THERE IS NO PROCEDURE, AND I JUST HAVE MY OWN. EVENTUALLY I'LL REMARK ON THAT. I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A NEED FOR THAT. BUT THAT'S A TOPIC FOR ANOTHER DAY. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. [INAUDIBLE] Tamara Shamburger: KNOCK, KNOCK. Lynn Gray: HAMMER FOR. Tamara Shamburger: THAT WAS TOO FUNNY. SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU LEAVE. QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU, MS. SAUNDERS OR MR. SUPERINTENDENT, I GUESS, IN REGARDS TO LINES 12 AND 13, AGAIN, HISTORICALLY, HAS THE SUPERINTENDENT ONLY HAD 10,000? HISTORICALLY? Gretchen Saunders: FOREVER. Tamara Shamburger: WITH THE INCREASE OF 50,000, WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF DECREASE IN THE NUMBER OF CONTRACTS THAT THIS BOARD WILL SEE? LIKE WHAT'S GOING TO BE THE IMPACT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT NOW HAVING MORE AUTHORITY? Addison Davis: THROUGH THE CHAIR,
068OPENLY, YOU WON'T -- YOU WILL NOT SEE MANY BECAUSE THIS ISN'T ABOUT WHETHER IT'S APPROVED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT, CHIEF OF STAFF, FINANCIAL OFFICER. THESE ARE ITEMS THAT PARTICULARLY WE MAY NEED TO USE WHETHER WE'RE BUYING A COUPLE OF LCD PROJECTORS FOR A PARTICULAR SCHOOL, WHETHER WE'RE GOING OUT TO HIRE ADDITIONAL NEEDS, SUPPLIES FOR A PARTICULAR SCHOOL, WHETHER IT BE ART PLIES OR INVESTIGATION SUPPLIES. THESE ARE THINGS THAT ALLOW US GENERALLY TO DO WORK. YOU WILL SEE A DECREASE, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANT. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET IN THE STANDARD -- YOU KNOW, STANDARD ACROSS WHAT -- YOU KNOW, WHAT THE POLICY IS IDENTIFYING, YOU KNOW, FROM A STATE'S PERSPECTIVE AND WHAT OTHER SCHOOL DISTRICTS AROUND THE STATE. RIGHT NOW BROWARD, MIAMI-DADE, ORANGE, PINELLAS, PASCO AT 50,000. DUVAL COUNTY AT 75,000 AND PALM
069BEACH AT 250,000, WHICH I THINK IS SIGNIFICANTLY LARGE. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, JUST HAVING AVAILABILITY TO GET SOMETHING DONE AT THE RATE OF DONE, BUT MAKING CERTAIN IT TRULY ALIGNS WITH OUR STRATEGIC PLAN. ANYTIME WE FEEL THERE IS A NECESSITY IT WILL BE VERY CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET THE WORK DONE AT AN EXPEDITED RATE. Tamara Shamburger: THANK YOU. Addison Davis: YES, MA'AM. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER SHAMBURGER. MR. CONA. Steve Cona: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. A COUPLE OF THINGS. SO THE $50,000 MARK, WE MADE THAT CHANGE AT HILLSBOROUGH COMMUNITY COLLEGE WHEN I GOT THERE, AND IT DOES DECREASE A LITTLE BIT, BUT IT'S REALLY INSIGNIFICANT, AND I THINK GIVING THE TEAM THE FLEXIBILITY FOR THE 50,000 IS -- YOU KNOW, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. I WOULDN'T GO MUCH HIGHER THAN THAT, BUT
070I THINK 50,000 IS GOOD BECAUSE I THINK IT GIVES YOU -- IT TAKES AWAY SOME OF THE MUNDANE BUREAUCRACY OF ORDERING THINGS. AS REGARDS TO THE CONSTRUCTION PROCUREMENT AS WHAT MS. STUART SAID, FROM A CONSTRUCTION, ARCHITECTURAL ASPECT, WE FOLLOW THE STATE CCNA GUIDELINES. SO A LOT OF THAT IS ALREADY IN STATE STATUTE THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE POLICY. BUT I WILL SAY THAT I DO THINK WE NEED TO SEE AND MAYBE YOUR OFFICE, MR. FARKAS, CAN PROVIDE IT TO US, IS JUST HOW THE SELECTION PROCESS WORKS, LIKE WHO IS ON THE SELECTION COMMITTEE, WHAT ARE THE POINTS SCORED, WHAT ARE THE VALUES. THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT I THINK LEND SOME CONFUSION AS TO AS FAR AS THE CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECTURAL FIRMS GO, LIKE WHAT ARE THEY BEING JUDGED ON? IF THAT WAS SOMETHING
071THAT WE COULD LOOK AT AND ACTUALLY SEE AND MAYBE TWEAK, I THINK THAT'S MORE OF YOUR INTERNAL PROCEDURES, BUT I THINK IF WE COULD LOOK AT THAT, JUST SO WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING AND THEN THE PUBLIC CAN HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING HOW WE SELECT OUR ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER. I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MR. CONA, MEMBER STUART. Cindy Stuart: THANK YOU, JUST TO FOLLOW UP TO THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT IN THIS POLICY, TOO. I UNDERSTAND IT'S IN THE CONSTRUCTION FIELD, BUT MOST RECENTLY SPEAKING SPECIFICALLY TO AN ITEM THAT CAME BEFORE US, THERE WAS NOT PRESENTATIONS THAT HAPPENED AT THE LEVEL FOR A BID THAT WENT OUT. SO I WANT TO SEE THAT WE'RE CONSISTENT. IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO PRESENTATIONS FOR ONE RFP, WE SHOULD BE DOING
072IT FOR ALL OF THEM, NOT JUST FOR SELECT ONES. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME LANGUAGE TIGHTENED UP HERE. AND WITH RESPECT TO THE CONE OF SILENCE, I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT, A LOT OF US HAVE LONG-STANDING RELATIONSHIPS WITH VENDORS. I KNOW I DO. I KNOW OTHER BOARD MEMBERS THAT DO. AND SO I JUST THINK WE HAVE TO GOVERN OURSELVES AND UNDERSTAND. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, SUPERINTENDENT, THAT WHEN RFPs GO OUT, THE BOARD IS NOTIFIED. WE HAVE TO KNOW WHAT VENDORS OUT THERE HAVE AN ACTIVE RFP AND UNDER CONE OF SILENCE BECAUSE SOMETIMES THAT HAPPENS AND WE'RE NOT AWARE. I THINK IT'S IMPERATIVE, BUT I THINK THAT FOR THE MOST PART, OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH VENDORS IS IMPORTANT. WE HAVE TO GOVERN OURSELVES ON THESE ITEMS. HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH A VENDOR DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY -- NO
073ONE SHOULD AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME THAT WE'RE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT AN ACTIVE RFP. SO THAT'S -- I THINK THAT'S, AGAIN, SOME PLACE WE JUST GOVERN OURSELVES, BUT I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, SUPERINTENDENT, THAT WE GET BACK TO THE HABIT OF NOTIFYING BOARD MEMBERS WHEN RFPs GO OUT AND WHEN THERE ARE ACTIVE THINGS THAT WE ARE UNDER CONE OF SILENCE ABOUT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T SEEN THAT FOR A WHILE. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER STUART. THAT CONCLUDES THE DISCUSSION ON THIS PARTICULAR POLICY ITEM SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS ONE. OUR NEXT ITEM IS POLICY 6320.03, MS. DAVIS. Jim Porter: THIS IS ACTUALLY A BOARD POLICY SUGGESTED BY MS. GRAY. BOARD MEMBERS, A FEW YEARS AGO, FORMER BOARD MEMBER SUSAN VALDES BROUGHT FORWARD THIS POLICY THAT ENCOURAGED THE USE OF APPRENTICES. MS. GRAY HAS ASKED
074THAT THE POLICY BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE AS OPPOSED TO SUGGESTING IT AND ADDED SOME OTHER LANGUAGE. I'LL LET HER SPEAK TO IT AND I THINK MR. FARKAS HAS SOME COMMENTS AS WELL. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MR. PORTER. MS. GRAY. Lynn Gray: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU, MR. PORTER. WELL, AS IT STANDS UP NOW, WE'RE UP TO 20% USE OF APPRENTICES. THE BIG PICTURE, I THINK EVERY BOARD MEMBER WOULD AGREE, THE APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM SHOULD BE STATE REGULATED BECAUSE THE AUTHENTICITY OF STATE REGULATION INHERENT IN THAT WOULD GUARANTEE RETIREMENT BENEFITS, HUGE SCOPE OF WORK GUARANTEE. AND WHEN THE KIDS GET IN MIDDLE SCHOOL, THEY HAVE AN ACTUAL PATHWAY BY THE TIME THEY GET TO HIGH SCHOOL WITH ALL OF THE REINFORCEMENTS OF A CAREER, THEIR CONTINUOUS TRAINING AND ON AND ON IT GOES.
075SO STATE REGULATION, IN MY MIND, IS VERY CRITICAL. THE POINT OF THIS PARTICULAR ONE WHERE WE PUT IT DOWN, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER -- EXCUSE ME, LINE 13, WHO HAVE EXCEEDED THE APPRENTICESHIP UTILIZATION PROGRAM CRITERIA OF TOTAL HOURS WORKED WAS BEST REWARDED -- AND I KNOW THAT MR. FARKAS WILL SPEAK ON IT -- BY BONUS POINTS. AND THE BONUS POINTS, THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS, MR. FARKAS, HOW DO WE -- HOW WOULD WE, LET'S SAY, MAKE SURE THAT IS ASSIGNED TO THE APPRENTICES THAT ARE ON BOARD WORKING FOR OUR SYSTEM? NONETHELESS, I THINK THE IDEA OF MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE A FLORIDA STATE RECOGNIZED APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM IS CRITICAL. I THINK MAKING SURE OUR OWN, OUR STUDENTS HAVE THE REWARD SYSTEM OF GAINING THOSE POINTS IS VERY, VERY CRITICAL. SO I'VE JUST PUT IT DOWN WHERE
076IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR AND NOT -- IT'S NOT AS WORDY, BUT IT DOES GUARANTEE A LITTLE BIT MORE SAFETY FOR OUR FUTURE STUDENT APPRENTICES AND GIVES THEM INCENTIVE TO GO INTO THE FIELD OF TECHNICAL, VOCATIONAL EDUCATION, WHICH WE WANT THAT VERY MUCH SO. I WILL APPRECIATE ANY REMARKS MADE, BUT MR. FARKAS, DID YOU WANT TO SHARE SOME INFORMATION, TIPS? Christopher Farkas: YES, MA'AM. THE PUSH HAS BEEN TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE TEETH IN THE POLICY. WE HAVE AN ENCOURAGEMENT POLICY THAT WE BROUGHT THE LAST ROUND OF POLICIES, THE ROUND BEFORE THAT, EXCUSE ME, OF 20% PUSH FOR APPRENTICESHIP. THIS IS PUTTING AN AWARD BONUS ONTO THAT POLICY. SOME OF IT A COMPROMISE IN TRYING TO FIND A PLACE DIDN'T HAVE TOO MUCH WEIGHT FOR THE APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM BUT A LITTLE BIT OF INCENTIVE
077TO PUSH FOR THEM. OBVIOUSLY IN OUR DIVISION AND ALL THE AREAS IN OUR DIVISION, WE SUPPORT APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS. HOW TO CAPTURE THAT IS ALWAYS THE CHALLENGE. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MR. FARKAS. THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. MEMBER CONA? Steve Cona: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WASN'T ON THE BOARD WHEN 6320.03 WAS ADOPTED. AS SOMEONE WHO RUNS ONE OF THE LARGEST APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING PROGRAMS IN THE COUNTRY, THERE'S A LOT OF MISNOMERS AND A LOT OF MISINFORMATION THAT WAS JUST SHARED BY ONE OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS. APPRENTICES ARE OVER THE AGE OF 18, WHICH MEANS THEY ARE NOT STUDENTS. SO THAT'S ONE THING. SO THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT'S HELPING STUDENTS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK HARMS US, QUITE HONESTLY, I DON'T -- I AM NOT FOR REWARDING BONUS POINTS TO
078PROCURE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. I THINK WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT IS THOROUGH AND ADDING TO BONUS AMENITIES BECAUSE -- TWO BONUS POINTS BECAUSE A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER PROMISES TO USE APPRENTICES IS SOMETHING I CAN'T GET BEHIND. I DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD POLICY. I DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD FOR, QUITE HONESTLY, OUR PROCUREMENT PROCESSES AT ALL. 20% IS A BIG NUMBER TO HAVE 20% OF A MAINTENANCE PROJECT BE DONE BY APPRENTICES. THAT'S LIKE SAYING IF YOU GO IN FOR BRAIN SURGERY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMEBODY WHO IS TRAINING ON BRAIN SURGERY TO DO THESE PROJECTS. DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. APPRENTICES ARE LEARNING THEIR TRADE. LIKE I SAID, I DON'T THINK THIS POLICY -- I THINK IT'S A BURDEN ON YOUR STAFF, QUITE HONESTLY, TO TRACK THIS BECAUSE THE LAST TIME I CHECKED, WE PROCURE PROJECTS WITH CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS AND
079MOST OF THE TIME THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS DON'T EMPLOY APPRENTICES. IT IS THE SUBCONTRACTORS WHO DO. NOW WE'RE TRYING TO CHECK TIME SHEETS AND SIMILAR DOCUMENTATION. I JUST THINK IT'S A BAD POLICY. I THINK IT'S CUMBERSOME. I WOULD NEVER APPROVE SUCH A THING. ALTHOUGH I DO LIKE THE FACT THAT WE ARE ENCOURAGING APPRENTICESHIPS. I THINK THAT'S CRUCIAL. I DON'T THINK PUTTING A 20% NUMBER, VALUE ON IT, AND THEN MAKING IT BONUS POINTS. I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY FOR US TO BE IN THAT BUSINESS. OUR JOB IS TO BUILD FACILITIES AND BUILD THEM AT THE BEST PRICE FOR THE TAXPAYER. NOT TO MANAGE SUBCONTRACTORS EMPLOYEE BASE AND PICKING WHO THEY DECIDE TO HIRE. I WOULD NOT SUPPORT THIS. MR. PORTER, I WOULD CREATE A SUBSEQUENT POLICY TO REMOVE IT IN ITS ENTIRETY AND MAYBE TALK ABOUT ENCOURAGING
080APPRENTICESHIPS. THANKS. Jim Porter: IF I COULD, BOARD MEMBERS, TO YOUR POINT, THE ORIGINAL POLICY ONLY ENCOURAGES THE AMENDED POLICY REQUIRES AND GOES FURTHER AND ADDS BONUS POINTS. THE CURRENT POLICY JUST ALLOWS FOR THE OPTION. Steve Cona: I WOULD BE OKAY WITH KEEPING IT. I WOULDN'T BE OKAY WITH THE ADDED LANGUAGE. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MR. CONA. MEMBER STUART. Cindy Stuart: THANK YOU. THIS IS PROBABLY THE THIRD TIME THERE'S BEEN AN ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE. WHEN MS. VALDEZ BROUGHT THIS FORWARD PROBABLY THREE YEARS AGO, THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO, THERE WAS A LOT OF CONVERSATION AND THAT'S WHY YOU SEE A POLICY ONLY TWO LINES LONG BECAUSE THAT WAS THE ONLY AGREEMENT WE COULD COME TO WHICH WAS AN ENCOURAGEMENT PROGRAM AND NOT ALL THIS LANGUAGE ABOUT REQUIRING 20%, HAVING ONE IN FIVE OF
081THE EMPLOYEES ON A PROJECT BE AN APPRENTICE IS NOT SOMETHING I'M COMFORTABLE WITH EITHER, ALTHOUGH I DO ENCOURAGE, AND I THINK THERE IS A VERY HEALTHY APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND I THINK THERE ARE OTHER WAYS FOR APPRENTICES TO GET INTO THE SYSTEM. I AGREE WITH MR. -- A LOT OF MR. CONA'S SENTIMENTS. THIS IS NOT ABOUT OUR STUDENTS. ADDING BONUS POINTS TO CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS JUST -- THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE SHOULD BE IN THE MIDDLE OF. THANK YOU, MR. CONA. I WOULD AGREE WITH HIM THAT LINES 8 THROUGH 18 SHOULD BE STRICKEN AND IF WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THE POLICY, WE KEEP LINES 5 AND 6. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER STUART. MEMBER SHAMBURGER. Tamara Shamburger: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I AM GOING TO RELY ON THE EXPERT IN THIS MATTER,
082MEMBER CONA. I DO AGREE WITH ALL OF THE POINTS AND MEMBER STUART AS WELL. JUST TO, I GUESS, JUST FOR THE SAKE OF CONVERSATION AND TO, QUITE FRANKLY, BEAT A DEAD HORSE, EVEN LINES 5 AND 9 REALLY CONTRADICT EACH OTHER AT LEAST IN THE WAY I READ IT, WHERE IT SAYS THAT ON LINE 5, IT SAYS THAT THE BOARD SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE OPTION OF UP TO 20%, WHEREAS LINE 9 SAYS THAT BASICALLY THE BOARD SHALL REQUIRE THE 20%. SO THAT IS A DIRECT CONTRADICTION EVEN IN HOW THIS PROPOSED POLICY LANGUAGE IS WRITTEN. LASTLY, I WANT TO SAY I DO AGREE WITH THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS THAT EACH JOB THAT WE AWARD TO ANY SEAT SHOULD BE BASED ON ITS OWN INDIVIDUAL MERITS. GIVING EXTRA POINTS BECAUSE THEY PREVIOUSLY USED APPRENTICES CERTAINLY DOES NOT GUARANTEE THEY
083WILL USE THEM ON FUTURE JOBS THAT WE'RE GIVING THEM EXTRA POINTS FOR. I THINK THAT SETS BAD PRECEDENCE AND SETS A BAD SYSTEM OF AWARDING CONTRACTORS. LISTEN, IF THEY WANT TO DO BUSINESS WITH US, THEY OUGHT TO FOLLOW OUR POLICY, PERIOD. WE DON'T HAVE TO REWARD THEM. WE DON'T HAVE TO GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR TAKING THE CRASH OUT. LISTEN, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO IT. IT'S YOUR JOB. WE OUGHT NOT GIVE CREDIT FOR THAT. OTHERWISE, THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER INDUSTRIES THEY CAN WORK IN. IF WE SUPPORT OUR APPRENTICES, STUDENTS, WHOMEVER, THAT'S WHAT WE SIMPLY NEED TO DO. OTHERWISE WE WORK WITH CMs WHO WANT TO DO THAT. THOSE ARE MY OPINIONS. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MS. SHAMBURGER. MEMBER GRAY. Lynn Gray: LET ME COMMENT ON ONE OF THE COMMENTS ABOUT THIS IS NOT
084ABOUT OUR STUDENTS OR FOR OUR STUDENTS. MR. FARKAS, I KNOW MR. BROOKS IS NOT HERE, CURRENTLY, BUT WE KNOW THAT THE PROGRAMS IN OUR ERWIN VOCATIONAL TECH, BREWSTER AND THE OTHER VOCATIONAL TECH SCHOOLS NOT ONLY TRAIN OUR STUDENTS OF BELOW 18 BUT ABOVE. THERE IS AN EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF PROGRAMS THAT WE USE TO TEACH OUR STUDENTS, WHICH ARE CALLED PATHWAYS FOR APPRENTICESHIPS. SO IN MIDDLE SCHOOL WE KIND OF TANTALIZE THEM WITH THAT EXPECTATION. IN HIGH SCHOOL, THEY START ENGAGING IN SOME OF THOSE PROGRAMS. AM I INCORRECT WITH ALL THE LISTINGS THAT I READ OF ALL THE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE FOR OUR STUDENTS TO ENGAGE IN VOCATIONAL TECH? Christopher Farkas: NO THEY DO CONNECT. THE DIFFERENCE IN WHAT MR. CONA IS TALKING ABOUT IS THE FLORIDA STATE APPROVED PROGRAMS ARE USUALLY WHEN THEY GET
085HIRED BY A FIRM AND THEN THEY GO THROUGH AND THE FIRM PUTS THEM THROUGH THE TRAINING PROGRAM. WHAT WE DO IS WE OFFER WELDING CLASSES AND CONSTRUCTION CLASSES AS A PRECOLLEGE PROGRAM. A LOT OF TIMES THEY ARE EMPLOYED IN THAT, TOO. BUT THE APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS ARE PLENTIFUL. ABC HAS A HUGE PROGRAM. TONS OF PROGRAMS THROUGH HCC, THE IRON WORKERS, UNIONS HAVE IT. THERE ARE A VARIETY OF WAYS TO GET IT, BUT FLORIDA STATE APPROVED PROGRAMS ARE THE ONES THAT MR. CONA TALKED ABOUT, THE IRON WORKERS, ABC PROGRAMS, THINGS LIKE THAT. YES, THOSE ARE PATHWAYS TO GET INTO THAT, BUT A LOT OF TIMES ONCE THEY GET HIRED IS WHEN THEY GO THROUGH THE OFFICIAL APPRENTICESHIP WHERE THEY WORK AND GET PAID FOR THAT WORK. Lynn Gray: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MISNOMER
086THAT THIS IS NOT FOR OUR STUDENTS, THAT IS NOT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT. IT IS. IT IS TIED. IT MIGHT NOT BE THE BIGGEST TIE IN THAT MAYBE ABC HAS BUT THERE IS A HUGE RELATIONSHIP THAT WE HAVE. I WOULD SAY IN THIS DAY AND TIME WITH THE EMPHASIS AND THE MONIES GOING TO VOCATIONAL TECH THAT THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF TRYING TO GET OUR STUDENTS MORE INVOLVED IN THAT PATHWAY VERSUS LEFT. I SEE WHERE THE BOARD IS GOING, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO EVER SHARE SOMETHING THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE STUDENTS. THIS HAS A LOT TO DO WITH OUR STUDENTS AND IT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH THE FIELD THAT IS VERY MUCH IN NEED OF APPRENTICESHIPS AND OUR WORKFORCE IN TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA. WE ARE SO BEHIND IN GETTING SKILLED
087WORKERS IN EVERY INDUSTRY, EVERY CONTRACTOR, SUBCONTRACTOR. I WORKED IN THE BUILDING INDUSTRY, BY THE WAY, FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME WHEN I WAS MUCH YOUNGER. I'M NOT UNFAMILIAR WITH A LOT OF THE AVENUES. BUT APPRENTICESHIP TO ME, THIS MIGHT NOT BE THE POLICY BUT I DEFINITELY THINK WE NEED TO BE SHARING INCENTIVES TO GET OUR KIDS INTO THAT PATHWAY. NOT EVERYONE IS COLLEGE BOUND AND WE HEARD THAT OVER AND OVER, BUT IT IS TRUE. LET'S DON'T IGNORE THIS JUST BECAUSE OF A FEW WORDS, BUT LET'S GET THE BIGGER PICTURE IN MIND. MS. DAVIS, WE'LL WORK ON THIS AGAIN, AND WE'LL MAKE HOPEFULLY OUR NEXT POLICY CYCLE, MR. PORTER, AND MAYBE REFINE SOME OF THE POINTS. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. MEMBER CONA. Steve Cona: WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MEMBER GRAY,
088THIS, IF YOU WANT TO CREATE POLICY THAT STRENGTHENS OUR CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS THEN WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND NOT HANDOUTS FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. THAT DOESN'T HELP STUDENTS. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH STUDENTS. FLORIDA STATE RECOGNIZED APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS. YOU HAVE TO BE 18 YEARS OF AGE AND YOU HAVE TO BE WORKING FOR A CONTRACTOR. ALL OF THE GREAT PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR STABLE OF PROGRAMS, WE ARE TRAINING STUDENTS TO BECOME APPRENTICES. WE ARE NOT TRAINING APPRENTICES. SO I DO THINK THAT THIS POLICY HAS EVERYTHING TO DO. IT'S IN THE PROCUREMENT SECTION. SO I'M NOT SURE HOW SOMETHING IN THE PROCUREMENT SECTION CREATES CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR STUDENTS. THIS DOESN'T. SO I REALLY DON'T NECESSARILY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT IF YOU WANT TO
089CHANGE CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION, LET'S LOOK AT OUR EDUCATIONAL POLICIES AROUND THOSE THINGS AND NOT OUR PROCUREMENT POLICIES. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: ALL RIGHT. THAT CONCLUDES COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR POLICY. MR. CONA MENTIONED HIS ADVICE ON MAYBE JUST EVEN WITHDRAWING THE POLICY ALTOGETHER. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD -- Jim Porter: THE EXISTING POLICY ONLY IS A SUGGESTION. IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT. IF THAT'S SOMETHING THE BOARD WANTS TO CONSIDER, YOU CAN, BUT IT DOESN'T MANDATE ANYTHING. IT'S A POLICY STATEMENT THAT YOU BELIEVE THE APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM IS A GOOD ONE AND ENCOURAGES THE POLICY, BUT THAT IS A POLICY DECISION ON YOUR PART WHETHER YOU WANT TO KEEP THAT OR NOT. Melissa Snively: I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, IS IT EFFECTIVE OR IS IT IMPACTFUL? HAS IT -- BECAUSE IT IS AN OPTION. IT DOES
090SAY "SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE OPTION OF UP TO 20% OF APPRENTICES." MY QUESTION WOULD BE, HAVE WE EVALUATED THIS? AND IS IT USEFUL? ARE WE DOING ANYTHING OR ARE THEY JUST WORDS ON PAPER? Christopher Farkas: I'LL BE HAPPY TO TRY TO ANSWER THAT. WE DO NOT EXACTLY FOR THE REASON MR. CONA LISTED. WE HAVE TO KEEP THE PAYROLL RECORDS OF THE SUBCONTRACTORS OF OUR CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS TO MAKE SURE WE KEEP TRACK OF THAT RECORD. WE DON'T HAVE A VEHICLE IN PLACE TO DO THAT. IT WAS MUCH MORE AN ENCOURAGEMENT OF THE APPRENTICESHIP POLICY IN THEORY THAN THE ACTUAL HOLDING -- Melissa Snively: APPLICATION OF IT. BECAUSE WE'RE NOT REALLY USING IT AND IT'S JUST WORDS ON PAPER, I'M NOT SURE WHY WE HAVE A POLICY IN PLACE AT THAT POINT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING,
091MR. PORTER, IT'S JUST THERE. IT'S AN OPTION. BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT ALIGNS WITH ANYTHING THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING OR FULFILLING BY HAVING IT ON PAPER. BUT I'LL MOVE ON. MS. STUART AND MS. GRAY -- I'M SORRY, YOU WERE NEXT. MR. CONA AND THEN MS. STUART AND MS. GRAY. Steve Cona: I'M OKAY WITH KEEPING THE ENCOURAGEMENT. IF YOU WANT TO GET RID OF IT I'M FOR THAT, TOO. I WILL SAY JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE LIGHT, I DO KNOW MANY OF OUR SUBCONTRACTORS WHO ARE BUILDING OUR SCHOOLS AND THE MAJORITY OF THEM HAVE WELL, ROBUST APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS. SO WE HAVE APPRENTICES THAT ARE WORKING ON OUR PROJECTS. I CAN HIGHLIGHT AND SPOTLIGHT WHATEVER COMPANIES THAT YOU GUYS, YOU KNOW, WANT TO SEE, BUT THE PROGRAM IS WORKING. I THINK ENCOURAGING APPRENTICESHIP IS GREAT. MANDATING
092IT, I WOULD NEVER BE FOR THAT. THANKS. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT, MR. CONA. MS. STUART. Cindy Stuart: JUST TO BE CLEAR, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF US REMOVING THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD AND JUST LEAVING LINES FIVE AND SIX, MR. PORTER. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MS. STUART. MEMBER GRAY. Lynn Gray: YES. ACTUALLY, MEMBER CONA, WE'RE REMINDED THAT YOU ARE ON THE COMMITTEE THAT I STARTED WITH THE HCC, YOURSELF, AND WE WERE GOING TO COMMIT OURSELVES TO A JOINT VENTURE IN HELPING OUR STUDENTS BECOME NOT ONLY VOCATIONALLY BOUND BUT ALSO APPRENTICESHIP-BOUND, AND THAT WAS A VERY BIG INITIATIVE. SO I HAVEN'T STOPPED THAT QUEST. STILL WORKING ON IT. I WOULD AGREE THAT WITH ALL THE DISSIDENCE THAT WE'RE HEARING AND ALL THE REMARKS, I MUST HAVE HIT A NERVE
093SOMEWHERE. THAT WAS NOT MY INTENT. MY INTENT, OF COURSE, IS FOR THE STUDENTS TO BE GETTING A MORE MATURE PATHWAY TO ENSURE THEIR MOTIVATION, AND I WILL ALSO SAY WHAT WE HAVE ON THE PAPER, MADAM CHAIR AND BOARD, IF IT'S WRONG ON THE OTHER TWO PARAGRAPHS, THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, THE ORIGINAL LINES IS NOT RIGHT EITHER. I WOULD SAY LET'S JUST REWRITE IT AND MR. PORTER, YOU'RE LOOKING GRIM AS. DO YOU HAVE A VERSION THAT IS ANTITHESIS OF WHAT I SAID. Jim Porter: I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU JUST SAID, QUITE FRANKLY. THE POLICY HAS WRITTEN -- I'LL READ IT. ANY CONTRACT FOR MAINTENANCE OR CONSTRUCTION APPROVED BY THE BOARD SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE OPTION OF UP TO 20% USE OF APPRENTICES. THAT CREATES AN OPTION. THAT'S THERE. THAT'S THE EXISTING POLICY. IF THE POLICY YOU HAD
094SUGGESTED HAD BEEN TAKEN FORWARD BY THE BOARD, POINTED OUT THERE WAS A CONTRADICTION IN LINE 5 THAT WOULD BE CLEANED UP BEFORE PUBLIC HEARING. THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE WORKSHOP TO GO THROUGH THINGS LIKE THAT. MY SENSE IS THE BOARD DOESN'T WANT TO GO FORWARD WITH LINES 8 THROUGH 18. SO THE POLICY, IF THE CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD IS THAT THE BOARD IS FINE WITH CREATING THE OPTION, THERE'S NOTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. YOU CAN CERTAINLY PROPOSE SOMETHING, BUT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO. Lynn Gray: WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE. Jim Porter: OKAY. YOU NEED TO SPECIFY WHAT THAT MEANS. Lynn Gray: IN ANOTHER POLICY WORKSHOP. TAKING WHAT WE HAVE NOW -- Jim Porter: TO SAY WHAT? Lynn Gray: TO SAY -- WELL, TO MAKE
095SURE THAT IT'S MORE RELEVANT. MAYBE THE 20% NEEDS TO BE ALTERED AND THOSE SUGGESTIONS THAT THE BOARD HAS SHARED WITH THE TWO BONUS POINTS. WHAT I'M SAYING IS I DON'T WANT TO THROW THE WHOLE THING OUT, BUT RATHER REVISE FOR THE NEXT POLICY CYCLE BASED ON THE COMMENTS MADE. Melissa Snively: MR. PORTER, IF I MAY, SO WE CAN KEEP THINGS MOVING, THE CONSENSUS I'VE HEARD IS KEEP LINE 5 AND 6 FOR NOW. I WOULD ENCOURAGE MS. GRAY TO WORK WITH MR. PORTER OUTSIDE OF OUR WORKSHOP TODAY AND PERHAPS WITH EITHER PROCUREMENT OR MR. FARKAS -- Jim Porter: REALLY MR. FARKAS AND MR. BROOKS. Melissa Snively: REALLY WORK TOWARDS WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET TO WITH THEM, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S ACHIEVED IN THIS PARTICULAR POLICY IS WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE BOARD. Lynn Gray:
096THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. I'M SORRY -- Melissa Snively: I KNOW YOUR INTENTIONS ARE GOOD. WE JUST NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHERE IT FITS AND IF IT DOES FIT SOMEWHERE ELSE. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO POLICY 8442. Jim Porter: POLICY 8442 AND 8462 ARE THE ONES REFERENCED EARLIER BY MS. WHALEY. THOSE ARE ADDING THE WORD "VOLUNTEER" AND THEY ALIGN TO THE POLICY EARLIER. THE BOARD ALREADY SORT OF DISCUSSED THAT. THEY ARE JUST ADDING THE WORD "VOLUNTEER" TO THAT. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU. MR. DAVIS WANTED TO BE RECOGNIZED I THINK FOR A MOMENT. Addison Davis: THROUGH THE CHAIR, RIGHT NOW WE ARE PRESENTING THE FIVE-YEAR EDUCATION FACILITY PLAN TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION. OUR TIME JUST GOT PICKED RIGHT NOW. WE ARE AT THE END OF THEIR MEETING. I'M ASKING PERMISSION TO TRADE
097PLACES WITH ONE OF MY STAFF MEMBERS TO COME UP TO BE ABLE TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT WE CONTINUE TO ARTICULATE OUR NEEDS THE NEXT FIVE YEARS AND MAKE SURE WE'RE WORKING IN CONCERT FOR THESE LOCATIONS. OKAY. WHO IS IN THE HOT SEAT? PROFESSOR, MR. McAULEY. AND THANK YOU, EVERYBODY FOR THEIR INSIGHT. REALLY APPRECIATING IT. Melissa Snively: GOOD LUCK AT YOUR BOCC MEETING AND PRESENTATION. DO WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT 8442 -- Jim Porter: NO, THOSE ARE DONE. YOUR NEXT ONE IS THE NEW POLICY IN CHARTER SCHOOLS. Melissa Snively: SCHOOLS OF HOPE. Jim Porter: STAFF-INITIATED POLICY. HODGENS WILL -- Jenna Hodgens: THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO THIS POLICY. AS YOU'RE AWARE, WE HAVE A POLICY FOR CHARTER SCHOOLS AND SCHOOLS OF HOPE WAS THEN PUT INTO LEGISLATION BACK IN MARCH OF -- OR JULY OF 2017.
098SO I FELT THAT BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE OUR FIRST SCHOOLS OF HOPE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BEGINNING IN 2021, WE SHOULD HAVE A POLICY FOR THAT. THIS POLICY IS STRICTLY ALIGNED TO THE STATUTE OTHER THAN ONE ITEM, WHICH IS B-3. B-3 ALLOWS US TO EXTEND THE 60-DAY TIMELINE IF NECESSARY WITHOUT LOSING FUNDING OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEE. CURRENTLY, WHAT HAPPENS IS A SCHOOL OF HOPE IS DEFINED BY THE LEGISLATION. HOPE OPERATOR IS APPROVED BY THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. AT THAT POINT IN TIME, THAT HOPE OPERATOR CAN APPLY TO OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT THROUGH A PROCESS THAT IS NOT ANYTHING LIKE THE TYPICAL APPLICATION PROCESS FOR A CHARTER SCHOOL. THEY SUBMIT A PERFORMANCE-BASED AGREEMENT WITH A NOTICE OF INTENT, AND THIS SCHOOL DISTRICT, THIS BOARD HAS 60 DAYS TO APPROVE THAT NOTICE OF INTENT AND PERFORMANCE-BASED AGREEMENT. ONCE THE
099INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED TO US, WE HAVE TEN DAYS TO LET THE OPERATOR KNOW IF THEY HAVE ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS. THEN THE OPERATOR HAS TEN DAYS TO FIX THOSE ERRORS AND OMISSIONS. THERE IS SOME FLEXIBILITY IN NEGOTIATING BUT THE NEGOTIATION OF THE PERFORMANCE-BASED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN QUITE DIFFICULT FOR US BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO NEGOTIATE WITH US. SO, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE ONE CHANGE THAT IS NOT STATUTORILY REQUIRED IS THAT 68 TIMELINE MOVES VERY, VERY QUICKLY WHEN YOU THINK SUBMITTING IT, TEN DAYS FOR US TO LET THEM KNOW, TEN DAYS TO CREATE CHANGES IN THEIR AGREEMENT AND THEN GETTING TO THIS BOARD FOR APPROVAL. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE POLICY. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE EXPLANATION ON THAT. MS. STUART. Cindy Stuart: MY QUESTION WOULD BE BOTH FOR LEGAL AND FOR THE
100CHARTER DIVISION. I UNDERSTAND WE'RE GOING TO MUTUALLY AGREE IN WRITING TO POTENTIALLY EXTEND, HOW DOES THAT HOLD UP IN TALLAHASSEE WITH THE DOE AND IN COURT? BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE MY CONCERN IS THAT WE AGREE SOMETHING AND BACK OUT AND IT'S NOT STATUTE. Jenna Hodgens: SO THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, AND I DID ASK THAT QUESTION OF OUR SCHOOL BOARD ATTORNEY, AND HE SAID THAT IF IT WAS WRITTEN IN THE POLICY, THAT HE FELT THAT IT WOULD HOLD UP. THAT'S WHY I LEFT IT THERE. WE WOULD DO IT THROUGH A FORMAL PROCESS, MS. STUART. WE WOULDN'T JUST HAVE A CONVERSATION ON THE TELEPHONE. A LETTER WOULD BE WRITTEN AND THAT LETTER WOULD BE WRITTEN BACK. SO IT WOULD BE MEMORIALIZED. SO THAT IS WHY I LEFT IT IN THE POLICY BECAUSE I DID RUN IT BY
101THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ATTORNEY. Jim Porter: CORRECT, NOT THE SCHOOL BOARD ATTORNEY. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO REVIEW THAT AS WELL. Cindy Stuart: WELL, MY ONLY CONCERN WOULD BE GIVEN THAT THIS IS SUCH A TIGHT TIMELINE, WHAT HAPPENS, EVEN IF IT'S IN OUR POLICY, IT'S NOT STATUTE, AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY CHALLENGE? I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WANT TO BE THE FIRST ONES CHALLENGED BY A CHARTER SCHOOL, A SCHOOL OF HOPE THAT COMES TO THIS DISTRICT, WHICH I BELIEVE WE HAVE A FEW COMING THIS WAY. THAT WOULD BE MY CONCERN, LEGALLY HOW WE WOULD BE CHALLENGED -- EVEN IF IT'S IN OUR POLICY IT COULD BE CHALLENGED. Jim Porter: HAPPY -- IF THIS MOVES FORWARD TODAY, I'LL BE HAPPY TO LOOK AT THAT BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MS. STUART. MS. GRAY. Lynn
102Gray: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND, OF COURSE, THERE IS THE FAMOUS BOOK THAT MEMBER SNIVELY SHARED ABOUT THE WHY. I'M GOING TO ASK THE SAME. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU READ IT OR NOT. I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NAME OF IT, MADAM CHAIR. DO YOU REMEMBER -- Melissa Snively: START WITH WHY. Lynn Gray: START WITH WHY. SO I WANTED TO ASK YOU WHY. YOU PUT NUMBER 3 IN RED. WAS THERE A REASON FOR YOUR RATIONALE? THANK YOU, MS. HODGENS. Jenna Hodgens: THANK YOU, MS. GRAY. THAT IS BECAUSE EVERYTHING IN BLUE IS STATUTORY. WHAT IS IN RED IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE ADDING IN THAT'S SPECIAL FOR OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT. DOES NOT ALIGN WITH STATUTE. Lynn Gray: WHY DID YOU PRESIDENT THAT IN THERE? Jenna Hodgens: THE REASON WE PUT IT IN THERE IS BECAUSE IF WE GO
103PAST 60 DAYS, IF WE GO TO 61 DAYS, EVERY CHARTER SCHOOL IN THE DISTRICT WOULD BE REDUCED TO 1% ADMINISTRATIVE FEE UNTIL WE NEGOTIATE THAT PERFORMANCE-BASED AGREEMENT NOTICE OF INTENT. SO THIS WAS GIVING FLEXIBILITY IF BOTH PARTIES AGREED THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GO PAST THE 60 DAYS AND WE WOULD NOT HAVE TO EVER LOSE ANY FUNDING FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEE. Lynn Gray: WITH THIS, ARE WE PROTECTING THE FINANCIAL WELL-BEING OF OUR DISTRICT? Jenna Hodgens: ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. Lynn Gray: THAT'S WHAT I WOULD ASK. AND THAT WOULD SATISFY ME AS TO WHY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE MUST DO AT ALL TIMES. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. I THINK THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF OUR BOARD COMMENTS. SO THANK YOU, JENNA, FOR THE EXPLANATION OF THIS PROPOSAL TODAY. WE'LL
104GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE. Jim Porter: THE NEXT POLICY WAS INITIATED BY BOARD MEMBER PEREZ AND DEALS WITH INVOLUNTARY EXAMINATIONS. I'LL NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT JULIE HOLT, THE PUBLIC DEFENDER HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT AS WELL AND HAS REVIEWED THIS. IF IT GOES FORWARD, WE'LL HAVE COMMENTS FROM HER EITHER THROUGH WRITING OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. Melissa Snively: JUST TO CLARIFY, THE FACT THAT ALL OF IT IS IN BLUE -- Jim Porter: BRAND-NEW POLICY. Melissa Snively: IT IS A BRAND-NEW POLICY. IS IT STATUTORY AS WELL? Jim Porter: THERE WAS A STATUTE THAT ALIGN WITH THIS. IT WAS VETOED. THE STATUTE WAS NOT ADOPTED THIS SESSION. BUT THE BOARD STILL HAS THE POLICY -- THE POWER TO ADOPT THE POLICY IF THAT'S THE BOARD'S DESIRE. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU. WE'LL
105MOVE ON TO MS. PEREZ FOR AN EXPLANATION. Karen Perez: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. AS OUR BOARD ATTORNEY STATED, WELL, THE BAKER ACT POLICIES ARE SET BY INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS, BY THE WAY. IN 2018-2019 SCHOOL YEAR, WE HAD 476 BAKER ACTS. AND IN 2019, 2020, WE HAD 324. MANY PARENTS HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY OUTSPOKEN REGARDING THEIR CHILDREN'S EXPERIENCE REGARDING THE INVOLUNTARY BAKER ACTS WITHOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE. WE HAVE HAD STUDENTS WHO HAVE BEEN TRAUMATIZED AFTER THIS EXPERIENCE, ESPECIALLY CHILDREN WITH NEUROLOGICAL PROBLEMS WHO WERE BAKER ACTED AND THEIR PARENTS WERE NOT NOTIFIED. AND THEN ALSO, SOME OF OUR STUDENTS WHO HAVE MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS. BAKER ACTING HAS BECOME A KNEE-JERK SOLUTION FOR HANDLING CHILDREN, AND IT HAS BECOME AN EVEN BIGGER PROBLEM IN OUR DISTRICT. HAVING THE MENTAL HEALTH TEAM IS A MAJOR WIN FOR THIS DISTRICT AS AN
106ALTERNATIVE TO BAKER ACTING OUR CHILDREN. SO THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I SAT DOWN, I SPOKE WITH JULIANNE HOLT REGARDING LOOKING AT A POLICY FOR THIS DISTRICT FOR BAKER ACTING. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MS. PEREZ. WITH REGARD TO SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT YOU SHARED -- THANK YOU FOR SOME OF THAT -- DATA THAT GIVES THIS SOME CONTEXT, I DON'T KNOW IF MR. McAULEY HOW FAMILIAR YOU ARE WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT AND IF THIS WOULD BE A -- OBVIOUSLY A POSITIVE. I WOULD THINK SPEAKING AS A PARENT, FROM A PARENT PERSPECTIVE, I THINK I WOULD BE HIGHLY UPSET IF MY CHILD WAS BAKER ACTED WITHOUT NOTIFYING ME FIRST OR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO INTERVENE. BUT CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT IN OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT? Michael McAuley:
107YES, MA'AM. THROUGH THE CHAIR, I HAVE HAD LOTS OF CONVERSATIONS WITH TRACYE BROWN AND SOME OF HER STAFF REGARDING HOW BAKER ACTS ARE GENERALLY INITIATED HERE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MS. BROWN, IT'S GENERALLY LAW ENFORCEMENT, SROs THAT MAKE THAT DECISION. RIGHT, IN CONSULTATION WITH OUR TEAM SERVICES AND WE NOTIFY PARENTS BEFORE BAKER ACTING. Michael McAuley: WE'RE LOOKING AT STRENGTHENING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE MENTAL HEALTH SIDE OF THE DISTRICT AND THE LAW ENFORCEMENT SIDE SO THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT IS NOT FORCED TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS, PARTICULARLY WHEN WE HAVE A MENTAL HEALTH CLINICIAN EITHER ON-SITE OR READILY AVAILABLE TO HELP IN CONSULTATION WITH THAT. ALL TOO OFTEN WE SEE KIDS THAT JUST NEED TO DE-ESCALATE, PUT THEM IN A QUIET SPACE, SO BAKER ACT ISN'T NECESSARILY THE ROUTE WE WANT TO
108GO, HOSPITALIZATION IS A LAST CHOICE IN THAT REGARD. AND WE TEND TO SEE THIS MOST OFTEN IN SCHOOLS WHERE STUDENTS OF COLOR ARE AT A DISADVANTAGE. WE WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR IN THE KIND OF APPROACH WE TAKE REGARDING WHEN WE INITIATE THAT PARTICULAR ACTION. ONE THING I WILL SHARE JUST FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE, THE IDEA OF NOTIFYING PARENTS IS OBVIOUSLY CRITICAL, AND WE WOULD NEVER DO ANYTHING WITHOUT SOMEHOW GETTING AHOLD OF A GUARDIAN. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN THE STUDENT IS IN CRISIS POSSIBLY BECAUSE OF SOMETHING RELATED TO THE PARENT OR THE GUARDIAN. SO WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENTS ON WHEN TO MAKE THAT NOTIFICATION SO WE ENSURE THE STUDENT IS GETTING THE RIGHT KIND OF CARE OR AT LEAST SET UP FOR THE RIGHT KIND OF CARE BEFORE THEY CAN INTERVENE IN
109MAYBE A LESS THAN HEALTHY MANNER WOULD BE THE RIGHT -- Melissa Snively: THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION AS WELL. SO MY NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE MAYBE TO MR. PORTER. I CAN APPRECIATE WHAT THIS POLICY DOES. IS THIS MORE PROCEDURAL THAN POLICY OR IS THIS STILL FALL TO THE SIDE OF POLICY? Jim Porter: IT'S A POLICY. IT'S REALLY SETTING OUT THE BOARD'S INTENT OF HOW THESE THINGS SHOULD BE HANDLED. STAFF WOULD HAVE TO IMPLEMENT IT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH IT, BUT IT DEFINITELY IS IMPORTANT IF THIS IS WHERE YOU WANT TO GO THAT ESTABLISHES WHAT YOUR POSITION IS ON THIS ISSUE. Melissa Snively: SO THEN AS -- I'M GOING TO READ THIS ONE MORE TIME. BUT I'M FEELING LIKE I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS, BUT WHAT YOU'VE MENTIONED ABOUT SOMETIMES WHEN A PARENT INTERVENES IN A
110NON-HEALTHY WAY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ADDRESS AS WELL, BECAUSE AS PARENTS, YES, WE WANT TO BE NOTIFIED BUT IF IT'S INTO THE HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP, THEN MAYBE WE HAVE TO WORK AROUND THAT. BUT I'M GOING TO READ IT ONE MORE TIME AND LET SOME OF THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS GO AHEAD AND ASK SOME QUESTIONS. MEMBER STUART. I'M SORRY, MS. GRAY. I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. MS. GRAY, MS. STUART, MR. CONA. Lynn Gray: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I'M GOING TO THANK MEMBER PEREZ FOR BEING SENSITIVE TO THIS PARTICULAR PROBLEM AND MR. McAULEY AS WELL. I WILL SAY THIS, HISTORICALLY, WE DIDN'T DO BAKER ACTS IN THE '70s, '80s, '90s. IT WAS SO RARE. AT JESUIT, IT WAS RARE. WE DID IT WITH MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING AND NOW THAT YOU HAVE LAW ENFORCEMENT INVOLVED,
111I MEAN, THAT IS A HUGE DISCRIMINATORY NIGHTMARE FOR MANY KIDS. THEY ALREADY HAVE A FEAR OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, LET ALONE HAVE A MENTAL DIFFICULTIES COMBINED. SO I THINK THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT STEP, MEMBER PEREZ. AND I SAY THANK YOU AGAIN BECAUSE IT IS, AS I'VE ALWAYS SAID DURING THIS COURSE OF THE WORKSHOP, WE HAVE TO START REMINDING OURSELVES TO HAVE POLICIES THAT REFLECT THE TIMES THAT WE'RE LIVING IN. RIGHT NOW, WE WENT WAY OVERBOARD WITH THE BAKER ACTS. IT'S LIKE ALMOST AS EASY AS A REFERRAL PROCESS. I KNOW THERE'S REASON FOR IT. THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS, BUT IT SHOULD BE EXCEPTIONS AND NOT THE RULE. AND SO THAT'S MY OPINION ON THAT. THANK YOU, MEMBER SNIVELY. I'M DONE TALKING. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. MEMBER STUART. Cindy Stuart: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU,
112MS. PEREZ, FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I, TOO, HAVE WORKED WITH MS. HOLT FOR QUITE SOME TIME ON BAKER ACTS AS WELL AS HOLLY SAIA'S GROUP AND MS. BROWN. I LIKE THIS POLICY. I'M WONDERING IF THIS WILL COME BACK IN LEGISLATION THIS YEAR AS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. I KNOW THE LEGISLATION WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE FINE TUNED THAN THIS AND A LITTLE STRICTER. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE ALSO BEEN TALKING ABOUT AND WORKING WITH MS. HOLT AROUND A MOBILE CRISIS TEAM BECAUSE A LOT OF WHAT HAPPENS IS KIDS GET PULLED INTO AN OFFICE. THEY SAY SOMETHING THAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT INTEND TO DO AND WE, I THINK, GET INTO A MAKE SURE LIABILITY-WISE WE'RE NOT PUTTING OURSELVES IN A BAD SITUATION. WE CALL LAW ENFORCEMENT. LAW ENFORCEMENT THEN REEXAMINES THE CHILD
113AND THEN MOVES A CHILD TO A CRISIS CENTER TYPE SITUATION IN WHICH, IN FACT, THE CHILD IS NOT KEPT. THE CHILD IS THEN RELEASED TO EITHER A PARENT OR A GUARDIAN. THE WHOLE PROCESS IS TRAUMATIZING FOR THE KID AND THE CHILD IS NOT GETTING THE SERVICE -- OR THE RESOURCES THAT THEY ACTUALLY NEED TO MOVE FORWARD. WE DO HAVE A HIGHEST NUMBER OF BAKER ACTS IN THE STATE. THAT'S UNFORTUNATE. I DON'T CARE HOW YOU SLICE THE NUMBERS, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAS A LARGE NUMBER OF BEDS AND FACILITY AND NOT ENOUGH FOR THE NUMBER OF KIDS THAT ARE IN CRISIS. BUT WE DO HAVE, BUT THE NUMBER OF BAKER ACTS AND KIDS GETTING TRANSPORTED TO FACILITIES AND THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF CASES THAT GO FORWARD IS -- THERE'S A HUGE DISPARITY. I DO AGREE, THERE IS A
114HUGE DISPARITY IN SOME OF OUR SCHOOLS WHERE BLACK AND BROWN CHILDREN ARE ACTUALLY ENDING UP IN THESE SITUATIONS MORE THAN OTHER CHILDREN. I THINK SOME OF THIS REVOLVES, TOO, AROUND THE FACT THAT THERE'S LAW ENFORCEMENT ON EVERY SINGLE CAMPUS. AND THAT MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE. THERE'S A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER READILY AVAILABLE TO EVERY PERSON WHO MAY OR MAY NOT NEED AN INTERVENTION, BUT I AGREE, RESTORATIVE PRACTICES UNFORTUNATELY HAS TO BE PART OF THIS CONVERSATION, AND AGAIN, I WANT TO GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE ARE TALKING TOGETHER ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE NEED RESTORATIVE PRACTICES TO BE PART OF THIS. PEOPLE NEED TO BE TRAINED IN TRAUMA-INFORMED CARE INSTEAD OF JUST PICKING UP A PHONE AND CALLING AN OFFICER TO DO A BAKER ACT IN WHICH THEY ARE NOT ALL TRAINED TO DO THAT KIND
115OF -- I MEAN, THEY ASK THREE OR FOUR QUESTIONS, AND THEN THEY MAKE A DETERMINATION. WE HAVE TO GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE'RE NOT PUTTING CHILDREN IN MARKED OR UNMARKED CARS AND TAKING THEM AWAY TO FACILITIES. AND THAT DOES HAPPEN. SO I'M ALL FOR, IN FAVOR OF THIS, BUT I THINK THERE'S A LOT MORE WORK THAT WE CAN DO. I'VE ALREADY HAD ONE MEETING WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT, MS. PEREZ, SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE THAT WORK AS I LEAVE THIS BOARD WAS MS. HOLT, I KNOW HER FOCUS IS ON STUDENTS AND STUDENTS IN TRAUMA MOSTLY BECAUSE THEY END UP IN HER COURTROOMS. I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THAT. AGAIN, I THINK THERE IS A LOT MORE WORK TO BE DONE AND THIS IS A GOOD FIRST STEP. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK
116YOU, MS. STUART. MEMBER CONA. Steve Cona: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND THANK YOU, MEMBER PEREZ, FOR THIS POLICY. JUST FOR CLARITY FOR THE PUBLIC'S PERSPECTIVE, WHAT WOULD BE A SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME OF THIS POLICY? I MEAN, WHAT -- IN YOUR MIND, MAYBE MS. PEREZ OR MR. McAULEY, IMPLEMENTING THIS POLICY WILL DO WHAT FOR OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT? I'LL DEFER TO MS. PEREZ. Karen Perez: MEMBER CONA, IS THAT INSTEAD OF HAVING THE CHILDREN BAKER ACTED THAT WE WOULD REFER THEM MORE TO OUR ALTERNATIVE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND POSSIBLY GET THEM THE HELP THEY NEED INSTEAD OF TRAUMATIZING THEM. WHAT HAPPENS ALSO IS WHEN WE REFER THEM AND BAKER ACT THEM, THEY START A CONTINUING PATTERN OF GETTING BAKER ACTED FROM THERE. AND WE TRY TO STOP THAT PATTERN BEFORE THAT CHILD GETS USED TO THAT. Steve Cona: THANK
117YOU, MEMBER PEREZ. I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AND THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE. I WOULD JUST LIKE MAYBE WE ADD IN THE MEASURABLE, BECAUSE WE HAVE REPORTING, THAT ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS REDUCING THE NUMBER OF BAKER ACTS. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO KNOW WHAT THE MISSION OF THE POLICY IS. I THINK REPORTING ON THOSE WOULD BE HELPFUL. REALLY, BAKER ACT IS NOT MENTIONED IN THE POLICY. I THINK AS AN OUTCOME, I THINK HAVING THAT IN THERE WOULD BE HELPFUL. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MR. CONA. READING IT ONE MORE TIME, I THINK IT ADDRESSES THE CONCERNS THAT I HAD ABOUT REPORTING IT, BUT I DID HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON PARAGRAPH ONE, LINE EIGHT, NOTIFY THE PARENTS OF A STUDENT, SHOULD WE ALSO INCLUDE AND/OR
118GUARDIANS IN THAT STATEMENT? AND DO WE WANT TO MAKE THAT PLURAL? BECAUSE WHEN IT COMES TO SPLITTING HAIRS, WHICH PARENTS AND GUARDIANS CAN DO, IF THE PARENTS ARE SEPARATED OR DIVORCED AND YOU CONTACT ONE PARENT BUT NOT THE OTHER PARENT, YOU SAID "PARENTS" IN YOUR POLICY, YOU DIDN'T SAY "PARENT." HOW SPECIFIC DO WE NEED TO GET SO THAT WE CAN GIVE OURSELVES ENOUGH SPACE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE FOLLOWING OUR OWN POLICY. Jim Porter: WE CAN CLEAN UP THAT LANGUAGE AND WORK WITH MS. BROWN ON THAT. Melissa Snively: OKAY. THANK YOU. THEN THE SECOND WOULD BE ON LINE 24, WHERE PROBABLY STATUTORILY AS IT WAS PROPOSED, THE SUPERINTENDENT WOULD REPORT TO THE DOE, BUT SHOULD WE BE REPORTING TO THE SCHOOL BOARD AT THIS POINT UNTIL THE DOE -- Jim Porter: VERY GOOD QUESTION, MADAM CHAIR.
119THAT LANGUAGE ORIGINALLY CITED A STATUTE. BECAUSE THE STATUTE WAS VETOED, WE LEFT THIS LANGUAGE IN, AND I THINK THAT ALSO CAN BE LOOKED AT BETWEEN NOW AND THE PUBLIC HEARING TO SEE WHAT'S THE MOST APPROPRIATE REPORTING PLACE TO DO IT. Melissa Snively: SEEMS LIKE IT SHOULD BE US. Jim Porter: YEP. Melissa Snively: UNTIL THE STATUTE REQUIRES IT AS AN ANNUAL REPORT TO THE DOE. Jim Porter: GOT IT. WE'LL LOOK AT THAT. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR THAT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO MS. SHAMBURGER. Tamara Shamburger: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. ALSO, REGARDING LINE 8, JUST A THOUGHT, MAYBE IT SHOULD -- MAYBE WE CONSIDER, LIKE CUSTODIAN OF RECORD OR SOMETHING. THAT WOULD COVER WHOEVER IS ON THE PAPERWORK AT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THAT'S WHO WE CALL. Jim Porter: VERY GOOD POINT, MS. SHAMBURGER.
120WE'LL LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE COMMONLY USED IN THE DISTRICT AND INSERT THAT INTO THE POLICY. Tamara Shamburger: OKAY. SO SOME FURTHER COMMENTS. I DO AGREE WITH THE PREVIOUS COMMENT THAT THE WORD "BAKER ACT" SHOULD BE VERY SPECIFIC IN THIS POLICY. THIS DOES, HOWEVER, THOUGH SEEMS TO POINT TO MEMBER PEREZ A NOTIFICATIONS POLICY. I DEFINITELY LOVE THE INTENT OF THIS POLICY, AS YOU STATED, WHICH IS TO ELIMINATE OR CURB BAKER ACTS AND GO MORE RESTORATIVE USING OUR MENTAL HEALTH NETWORK. I WOULD MAYBE SUGGEST THEN THAT THIS POLICY BE FURTHER AMENDED TO REALLY MAKE IT THAT INTENT AND THEN INCLUDE THE NOTIFICATION SECTION, WHICH ALL THIS IS ABOUT NOTIFYING. SO MAYBE YOU WANT TO CONSIDER THAT REALLY BUILDING SOMETHING. NOW, YOU DID MENTION THAT BAKER ACT POLICIES ARE SET BY THE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS. THANK YOU SO
121MUCH FOR THAT INFORMATION. MR. PORTER OR MS. PEREZ, IF YOU KNOW, WHERE IS OUR POLICY? I'VE LOOKED. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING REGARDING BAKER ACTS. IS IT ALL PROCEDURE? Jim Porter: I DON'T BELIEVE A POLICY EXISTS WHICH IS WHY THIS WAS BROUGHT FORWARD. Tamara Shamburger: OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MY RECOMMENDATION, WE'LL GO BACK TO YOU, MEMBER PEREZ, MAYBE CONSIDER DEVELOPING THIS POLICY A LITTLE BIT MORE TO TALK ABOUT THE INTENT OF THE POLICY, HOW IT WILL BE -- HOW THESE SITUATIONS WILL BE HANDLED. AND THEN INCLUDE THE NOTIFICATION WHEN A BAKER ACT IS DEEMED NECESSARY. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MS. SHAMBURGER. MEMBER PEREZ? Karen Perez: I THANK YOU, BOARD, FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN THIS POLICY. WE HAVE WORKED SO DILIGENTLY TO INCREASE OUR MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE HEALTHY COPING
122SKILLS FOR OUR STUDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES AND CREATING A STRONGER, HEALTHIER HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SCHOOL SYSTEM. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MS. PEREZ. AND MEMBER GRAY. Lynn Gray: YES. IN THE SPIRIT OF HEALTHY -- OR HEALTHY DISTRICT, THE MENTAL IS HUGE. BUT THE HOPE IS, MR. McAULEY AND MEMBER PEREZ, IS THAT OUR RESTORATIVE PRACTICES CARRYING OUT, SUCH AS POSITIVE BEHAVIOR INCENTIVE SUPPORTS AND MS. BROWN YOU'RE EVER SO FAMILIAR WITH THOSE SUPPORT SYSTEMS AND ALL OF THE MENTAL HEALTH AVENUES THAT WE WON'T HAVE BAKER ACTS. THAT'S THE GOAL. I MEAN, MAYBE WE'LL HAVE ONE OR TWO, BUT I'D LIKE FOR US TO HAVE THAT AS THE GOAL, BUT THE POLICY IS STILL NEEDED. SO IT'S RELEVANT. AND, AGAIN, MY THANKS. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. THAT CONCLUDES DISCUSSION ON THIS PARTICULAR POLICY. IT LOOKS LIKE
123THIS WILL BE MOVING ON. Jim Porter: THE FINAL POLICY BEING PROPOSED TODAY WAS ALSO BROUGHT BY MS. PEREZ. THIS IS A FACE COVERING POLICY. BOARD MEMBERS, YOU'LL RECALL AS PART OF THE REOPENING PLAN THAT THE BOARD APPROVED ON JULY 23rd, THERE WAS A MANDATORY FACE COVERING PROVISION EMBEDDED IN THAT POLICY. SO THE BOARD HAS ALREADY ENACTED WHAT IS THE EQUIVALENT OF A POLICY. MS. PEREZ FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO BRING THIS FORWARD. I'LL LET HER SPEAK TO WHY. BUT THE LANGUAGE HERE MIRRORS WHAT YOU PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED AS PART OF YOUR REOPENING PLAN. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MS. PORTER. MEMBER PEREZ. Karen Perez: THANK YOU. I JUST -- WHEN WE BROUGHT AND ENACTED THE FACE COVERING, YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE GREAT TO BRING FORWARD A POLICY, JUST LIKE WE HAD FOR THE
124UNIFORMS. I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A LONG-LASTING POLICY, BUT I THOUGHT IN CASE WE EVER HAD THIS ISSUE AGAIN, GOD FORBID THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT IT WOULD DICTATE TO OUR STUDENTS AND OUR STAFF WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR US FOR DOWN THE ROAD. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER PEREZ. MEMBER CONA. Steve Cona: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MR. McAULEY, WE DO HAVE AN EMERGENCY PROCEDURE PLAN AND WE HAVE ADDED ALL OF OUR COVID PROCEDURES INTO THAT PLAN, IS THAT CORRECT? Michael McAuley: YES, SIR. THROUGH THE CHAIR, WE -- Steve Cona: IS THIS LANGUAGE IN THAT EMERGENCY PROCEDURE PLAN? Michael McAuley: THE FACE COVERINGS REQUIREMENTS AND THE EXEMPTIONS, YES, SIR. Steve Cona: OKAY. SO IF IT'S IN THAT PLAN, THEN DO WE -- IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE NEED IN
125FORMAL POLICY? THAT'S JUST MY QUESTION. Jim Porter: YOU DON'T LEGALLY NEED IT BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO IT. IT'S ALREADY EMBEDDED AND YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED IT. Melissa Snively: ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE, MR. CONA? MOVING ON TO MS. STUART. Cindy Stuart: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. IN THE SAME SPIRIT, IF THIS IS ALREADY -- IT'S REDUNDANT LANGUAGE, THEN I'M NOT SURE WHY WE'RE BRINGING IT FORWARD. AGAIN, WE DON'T NEED TO BE SPENDING ADDITIONAL DOLLARS TO SIT HERE AND DISCUSS AND ADVERTISE AND BRING IT BACK AGAIN FOR SECOND HEARING IF THIS IS ALREADY COVERED, UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN ADDED OR IS MISSING, WE COULD CERTAINLY REFER TO OUR REOPENING PLAN. HOPEFULLY THAT'S NOT PERMANENT AND THIS ISN'T A PERMANENT SITUATION. I WOULD SAY THAT WE SCRAP THE WHOLE POLICY IF
126IT'S REDUNDANT. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER STUART. MEMBER HAHN. Stacy Hahn: THANK YOU. I WOULD AGREE WITH MEMBER CONA AND MEMBER STUART AROUND THIS. IF IT'S ALREADY IN OUR EMERGENCY PLAN, I DON'T SEE PUTTING IT IN POLICY IS NECESSARY. AND I WOULD SUPPORT MEMBER STUART'S SUGGESTION TO NOT BRING THIS FORWARD. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER HAHN. I WOULD AGREE. IF IT'S ALREADY IN ONE LOCATION. I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT, BUT ALSO, BECAUSE OF OUR FLUID SITUATION, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO PUT SOMETHING INTO A POLICY THAT IF SOMETHING LIFTS, THEN WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE POLICY CYCLE AGAIN IN ORDER TO REMOVE THE POLICY IN ORDER NOT TO BREAK OUR OWN POLICY. IF IT'S WITHIN THE EMERGENCY ORDER, THEN I'M OKAY JUST USING THAT INSTEAD OF ACTUALLY PUTTING A POLICY
127INTO PLACE. THANK YOU. MS. GRAY. Lynn Gray: YEAH. AND MEMBER PEREZ, I TOTALLY AGREE. FACE COVERINGS, IT'S THE WAY OF THE WORLD. I DON'T KNOW WHEN WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF SCENARIO -- IT'S NOT GOING TO BE IN THE NEAR FUTURE. WHAT I WANTED TO ASK YOU ONE MORE TIME IS YOU HAD A REASON FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD WHEN IT'S ALREADY -- IT'S ALREADY IN OUR LANGUAGE IN OUR PROCEDURES. BUT WAS THERE ANOTHER REASON, PERHAPS, THAT YOU WANTED TO BRING THIS FORWARD THAT I DIDN'T HEAR? I APOLOGIZE IF I DIDN'T HEAR IT. Karen Perez: JUST IN CASE WE HAD AN ISSUE FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD WHERE WE REQUIRED FACE COVERINGS LATER ON. Lynn Gray: WOULD YOU BE OKAY IF WE REVISIT THIS LATER ON DURING THE CYCLE PERHAPS MOVING DOWN THE ROAD?
128Karen Perez: OH, I'M FINE, SINCE IT'S IN THE EMERGENCY PROCEDURE, I'M FINE WITH IT BEING SCRATCHED. Lynn Gray: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU. SO WE'LL REMOVE THAT OUT OF THE POLICY BOOKLET. THE FINAL POLICY BROUGHT FORTH BY MS. STUART IS ONE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT WITH REGARD TO OUR FUND BALANCE AND FISCAL PLAN. Jim Porter: RIGHT. IF I COULD JUMP IN AT THIS POINT, YOU'LL RECALL THAT MS. STUART DID BRING UP THE ISSUE WITH THE FUND BALANCE AND THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF BOARD DISCUSSION ON IT. WE BROUGHT FORWARD THE POLICY TODAY JUST SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS AT PLAY. ONE, THERE IS A STATE LAW REQUIREMENT THAT OUR FUND BALANCE BE NO LOWER THAN 3%. YOU CAN SEE THAT
129THE BOARD'S POLICY IS MUCH MORE DETAILED AND GOES INTO SORT OF -- A MUCH DEEPER DIVE THAN WHAT THE FUND BALANCE IS. WE'RE BRINGING IT FORWARD TODAY SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE AND ALSO SO THE PUBLIC CAN REALLY FULLY APPRECIATE IT, BUT THE SUGGESTION IS THAT THE BOARD HOLD A WORKSHOP ON THIS ISSUE SO THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS WHAT THE FUND BALANCE IS AND ALSO THE PUBLIC DOES, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A MISCONCEPTION THAT THE FUND BALANCE IS THE EQUIVALENT OF YOUR PERSONAL SAVINGS ACCOUNT. IT'S THERE FOR THE BOARD TO USE WHEN YOU NEED TO DIP INTO YOUR SAVINGS. IT'S MUCH MORE COMPLEX AND MUCH MORE NUANCED THAN THAT. I THINK THAT THE LANGUAGE IN HERE SHOWS WHY THAT IS. MADAM CHAIR IT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION THAT YOU HAVE -- SCHEDULE A
130WORKSHOP AND THAT YOU LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE, CLEANING THE LANGUAGE UP, MAKING IT UNDERSTANDABLE AND THEN MAKING SOME DECISIONS ABOUT WHERE YOU WANT THE FUND BALANCE TO BE. BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS THERE A STATE LAW REQUIREMENT THAT IS IMPORTANT, YOU ALSO HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE DISTRICT AS PART OF ITS FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY HAS TO DEMONSTRATE TO THE BOND RATING AGENCIES THAT WE HAVE A ROBUST AND HEALTHY FISCAL SITUATION. THAT POLICY HAS TO BE REFLECTIVE OF THAT RELATIONSHIP THAT WE HAVE WITH OUR BOND RATING AGENCIES. THAT'S JUST ONE ELEMENT. MS. SAUNDERS CAN GO INTO IT IN MUCH MORE DETAIL THAN I CAN OBVIOUSLY. THE PURPOSE OF TODAY WAS SHOWING THE LANGUAGE AND REQUESTING THAT YOU HAVE A WORKSHOP TO FULLY UNDERSTAND IT AND PERHAPS CLEAN THIS LANGUAGE UP AND MAKE IT MORE UNDERSTANDABLE AND MORE APPROPRIATE.
131Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MR. PORTER. I WOULD AGREE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A WORKSHOP BECAUSE UPON REALLY READING THE POLICY, IT'S NOT ONLY LINE 27 THAT WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT, THERE ARE MANY OTHER ASPECTS OF THIS POLICY THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS AND BE -- AND DO IT PUBLICLY. THAT WAY THE BOARD CAN HAVE A BETTER APPROACH TO THIS. OKAY. WITH THAT, WE DO HAVE SOME BOARD COMMENTS AROUND THIS PARTICULAR POLICY. MEMBER STUART. Cindy Stuart: THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD, MR. PORTER. I WOULD AGREE. IN SITTING WITH STAFF AND KIND OF GOING THROUGH THIS, THERE ARE A LOT OF PIECES TO THIS POLICY THAT WE HAVE NEVER ADHERED TO. SO WHEN I HEAR THAT IT RAISES RED FLAGS FOR ME THAT WE'RE NOT ADHERING TO OUR OWN POLICY, THAT IT
132WAS PUT IN PLACE QUITE SOME TIME AGO, I THINK DR. HAMILTON WAS STILL HERE WHEN THIS POLICY WAS PUT IN PLACE, SO THE WHOLE ASSIGNED FUND BALANCE AND UNASSIGNED AND BUDGET STABILIZATIONS, I'VE NEVER HEARD THOSE WORDS BEFORE AND I'VE BEEN HERE EIGHT YEARS. WE NEED TO CLEAN THIS UP. IT'S MORE THAN A COUPLE OF WORDS TAKEN IN OR OUT OR INSERTED. I APPRECIATE IT AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE WORKSHOP. Melissa Snively: ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, MS. STUART. MEMBER GRAY. Lynn Gray: YES, THE ONLY THING I WOULD TOO, TOO, AND I WOULD SHARE WITH DR. KEMP IN MOVING FORWARD, WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT FISCAL PLANNING, NOT ONLY IN POLICY, BUT IN PROCEDURES, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, ONCE A MONTH AT A BOARD MEETING THAT WE DO A 15-MINUTE OVERVIEW OF WHERE WE STAND ALONG WITH OUR
133FUND BALANCE, WHATEVER VOCABULARY YOU WANT TO USE, OUR ASSETS AND OUR REVENUE -- I MEAN, OUR REVENUE AND OUR, YOU KNOW, OR DEBTS. IN OTHER WORDS, MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF INFORMATION. I KNOW MS. SAUNDERS AND I TALKED ABOUT THAT AS WELL, BUT WE KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE CUTS COMING UP AS WE GO ALONG, AND I THINK THE MORE AVENUES OF COMMUNICATION WILL BE THE BETTER FOR OUR PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND. AND IN A WAY, TOO, WE'RE ALL EDUCATORS, AND WE HAVE TO ALWAYS -- WE ARE REMINDED THAT WE'RE EDUCATING NOT ONLY OURSELVES BY WAY OF A WORKSHOP, BUT WE'RE EDUCATING THE PUBLIC. SO I THINK THIS IS A POSITIVE THING, AND THAT'S HOW I'D LIKE TO KEEP IT AS WELL. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. MEMBER
134CONA. Steve Cona: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. AS WE DIVE INTO THIS, IT'S COMING TO MY ATTENTION THIS POLICY MIGHT BE ACTUALLY HURTING OUR BOND RATING BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN. SO I THINK THAT BECAUSE OF -- I DO KNOW THERE ARE DISTRICTS OUT THERE WHO HAVE JUST AS MUCH DEBT AS WE DO AND JUST AS MUCH AND ONLY ARE SITTING AT 3%, AND THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, A HIGHER BOND RATING THAN WE DO. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT MAYBE THIS POLICY IS AFFECTING THAT. SO IF WE COULD GET SOME INPUT FROM MAYBE SOME OF OUR AGENCIES AND OUR VENDOR, OBVIOUSLY, THIS BOARD TO SEE IF THIS POLICY IS HURTING US. I'M ALL FOR CHANGING. YOU'RE RIGHT. I THINK WHEN YOU'RE EXAMINING THIS, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE'RE BREAKING OUR OWN RULES
135AND WHEN YOU BREAK YOUR OWN RULES, THE BOND AGENCY DOESN'T LIKE THAT. I THINK POTENTIALLY WE MIGHT HAVE TO KIND OF DIG A LITTLE DEEPER AND GET FEEDBACK FROM OUR STAKEHOLDERS AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE THIS POLICY BETTER. THANKS. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU. ALL GOOD POINTS, BOARD MEMBERS. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET THAT WORKSHOP SCHEDULED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO WE CAN ADDRESS SOME OF THESE -- SOME OF THE POLICY LANGUAGE AND OVERHAUL IT AS NECESSARY SO THAT WE CAN ABIDE BY OUR OWN POLICIES AND HOPEFULLY IMPROVE, WHICH WILL IMPROVE -- CONTINUE TO IMPROVE OUR RATINGS AND OUR FINANCIAL POSITION. THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE POLICY PROPOSALS FOR THIS WORKSHOP CYCLE. MR. PORTER, WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? Jim Porter: TURN IT OVER TO MS. DAVIS FOR THE TIMELINE. THE NEXT STEP IS WE'LL
136ADVERTISE AND HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'M NOT SURE OF THE DATE, IF WE HAVE ONE SCHEDULED. WE'RE WORKING ON THAT. Jim Porter: OKAY. BOARD MEMBERS, AS THINGS GET BACK TO NORMAL, HOPEFULLY BACK TO NORMAL, YOU WILL BE SEEING THE POLICY CYCLE AS I DESCRIBED AT THE BEGINNING HAPPENING MORE OFTEN. SOME OF THE THINGS THAT, FOR INSTANCE, MS. GRAY BROUGHT UP THAT NEED TO BE BROUGHT BACK, YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT ONCE A YEAR OR TWICE A YEAR. THE GOAL IS QUARTERLY. LIKE AT THE WORKSHOP, IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T QUITE MAKE SENSE NOW, WELL, YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT SIX MONTHS TO HAVE IT DONE. THAT IS THE INTENT, THAT IS THE GOAL AND WHAT THE BOARD AGREED TO. WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK TOWARDS THAT TIMELINE. AGAIN, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE, TOO, THAT MR.
137McAULEY IS WORKING ON A COMPLETE OVERHAUL OF THE POLICIES THAT WE'RE ALL VERY EXCITED ABOUT INTERNALLY BECAUSE I THINK IT WILL BE MUCH EASIER FOR THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC TO USE. Melissa Snively: MR. CONA HAS ASKED FOR A QUICK CLARIFICATION OF WHAT POLICIES ARE MOVING FORWARD, AN OVERVIEW, IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT THE TABLE OF CONTENTS AND WHAT'S MOVING FORWARD. Jim Porter: PLEASE, BOARD MEMBERS, THIS IS BASED ON MY NOTES AND WHAT I HEARD TODAY. PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. POLICIES MOVING FORWARD, POLICY 2430.02 DEALING WITH VOLUNTEERS. POLICY 6320 DEALING WITH PROCUREMENT. POLICY 8442 REPORTING ACCIDENTS, SLASH, INCIDENTS. POLICY 8462, STUDENT ABUSE AND NEGLECT. THE SCHOOL OF HOPE POLICY WHICH WE'LL ASSIGN A NUMBER TO. AND INVOLUNTARY EXAMINATIONS. THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT I HAVE DOWN AS MOVING FORWARD, AND I ALSO
138-- WE HAVE ALL TAKEN NOTES ON THE BOARD COMMENTS AND BETWEEN NOW AND THE PUBLIC HEARING, YOU'LL SEE REVISIONS BASED ON THE CONVERSATION TODAY AND ANY OTHER STAFF INPUT. Melissa Snively: THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, MR. PORTER. MEMBER GRAY, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT? Lynn Gray: I ACTUALLY HEARD THE WORDS BRING BACK ANTI-HARASSMENT, THE RACIAL EQUITY AS WELL, AND A REWRITE ON THE APPRENTICESHIP. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THAT BROUGHT BACK. Jim Porter: WE NEED TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION BECAUSE THAT'S NOT MY UNDERSTANDING. ON THE APPRENTICE, I THOUGHT THE BOARD AGREED THAT THE POLICY AS WRITTEN IS STAYING. IF YOU WANT TO -- AGAIN, I DON'T MEAN TO BE RUDE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING. Lynn Gray: NOT A QUESTION OF BEING RUDE, MR. PORTER. IT IS A QUESTION OF
139THE INTENT WAS EVERY ONE -- EXCUSE ME, NOT EVERY ONE -- SAID THE INTENT WAS VERY WELL SAID, BUT IT WAS SOME OF THE WORDING. WHEN YOU HAVE THE INTENT CONSISTENT WITH THE BOARD, I DON'T THINK IT'S A WISE IDEA TO THROW THE WHOLE POLICY OUT. Jim Porter: LET'S GO BACK TO THAT. WE NEED TO BE CLEAR. WE CAN'T ADVERTISE UNLESS WE GO FORWARD. BOARD MEMBERS, IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE APPRENTICE POLICY. Melissa Snively: I BELIEVE, MR. PORTER, THE CONSENSUS WAS TO LEAVE THE CURRENT POLICY AS-IS. Jim Porter: THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. Melissa Snively: THE SUGGESTION I MADE THAT MS. GRAY GO BACK TO MR. FARKAS' DIVISION, MAYBE WORK WITH YOU ON WHAT THE INTENTION WAS, THAT LANGUAGE, TO PLACE THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE TO MEET HER INTENTIONS. SO THAT'S HOW I
140UNDERSTOOD IT ANYWAY. IT WAS TO LEAVE LINES 5 AND 6 AS IS, BUT WORK ON A POLICY FOR THE NEXT POLICY CYCLE THAT ACHIEVES YOUR INTENTION. Lynn Gray: I AGREE. Melissa Snively: SO THAT IS NOT MOVING FORWARD. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. WHEN WE SAY "NOT MOVING FORWARD," WE MEAN NOT MOVING FORWARD IN THIS POLICY CYCLE, MS. GRAY. IT MEANS IT NEEDS ADDITIONAL WORK AND IT COULD PROBABLY BE PUT FORWARD IN THE NEXT POLICY CYCLE. Lynn Gray: OH, THAT BEING SAID, I DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE THROWN OUT. Melissa Snively: NO, NO, IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S THROWN OUT. Jim Porter: THE ONLY DISCUSSION NOW IS WHAT'S GOING TO BE ADVERTISED FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING BASED ON THE WORKSHOP TODAY, WHICH POLICY. SO THE RACIAL EQUITY ONE, AGAIN, MY NOTES REFLECT THAT THE BOARD -- THE
141CONSENSUS WAS THAT THE BOARD RATE FOR THE RACIAL EQUITY AUDIT THAT'S GOING TO BE DONE. THAT WOULD NOT BE MOVING FORWARD TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. Lynn Gray: I UNDERSTAND. THE WAY IT WAS WORDED, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND. I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE COMPLETELY DISMISSED. Jim Porter: THE ONLY DISCUSSION TODAY IS WHAT'S GOING FORWARD TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. NOT FOREVER IN TIME. JUST FOR THE NEXT -- THE CYCLE. Lynn Gray: THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND NOW. THANK YOU. Melissa Snively: WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. WITH THAT, THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS, FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE AT OUR 4:00 REGULARLY SCHEDULED BOARD MEETING. HAVE A GREAT DAY. MEETING ADJOURNED.