OCPS | 2026-05-19 Continuation of 2026-05-12 School Board Meeting

001Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat up here. Heat up here. Heat up Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Oh. Oh. Oh. Yeah, Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat up here. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Well, good evening. Oh my goodness. I knew it wasn't morning, but it's not quite evening. Good good afternoon everyone and welcome to the Orange County School Board special meeting scheduled for today, Tuesday, May 19th, 2026. And thank you all for joining us. We uh have all members except for member Douglas with us, but she will be joining us in just a few minutes. As a reminder, board members will not be engaging in outside electronic communication during the meeting so that we can focus our full attention

002on the business before me before us. To my fellow board members, district staff and members of the public when speaking, please speak directly into your m microphone and make sure it is turned on. Again, thank you for joining us and me member Douglas is present and has just arrived. We will now pause for a moment of silence and then I'll invite you to join us in the pledge of allegiance. And now for the pledge. >> I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Today's meeting is a continuation of the board's discussion and debate from last week, May 12th, 2026, school board meeting, and the item was 17.07, 07, which is

003the request to approve resolution ordering and providing for the holding of a referendum election to determine if the electors of the school district of Orange County, Florida, authorized the school board to extend the 1 mill spe special millage for four years for essential operating expenses to preserve essential academic programs, compensate teachers and support staff, protect arts, athletics, and student activities. >> The purpose of this meeting is to ensure that all be board members as well as the superintendent have the opportunity to participate in the discussion and for the board to vote on item 17.07 continued from the May 12th meeting. I would call for public comment but we have already taken public comment and uh that portion of this discussion and this item is no longer be before us and we also do not have

004any members of the public wishing to speak. >> Yes. >> Point of order. >> Yes. >> So I have I just have a point of order or a clarification question. I know that we're not taking comments from the public because this is a continuation of that board meeting, but we've added an addition of a onemill review that was not on the agenda of the board meeting last Tuesday. So, since we are adding additional information that wasn't on the agenda that was posted and this is a continuation of that meeting with new information, shouldn't we be allowing comment if needed? because this is new information like this this 1m mill overview was not given to us prior till today. Mr. Pal Pomearini, you're recognized. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. So, the agenda item that you are

005voting upon is the same as the one that was on May 12th. This uh document that I see in front of us is information, I guess, to help assist the board in its debate on this. And I'm not necessarily sure that necessitates reopening of public comment under the operative statutes. As you all know, I've uh provided you an email citing the operative statute that says that the public doesn't need to be given an opportunity to speak at the meeting where the the decisions finally made if they were given an opportunity to speak previously. Uh and they did do that on on May 12th. So I don't think as a matter of law it requires us to allow the public to speak again even though this is just additional information. The agenda item itself that the

006board is voting on is the same. I understand but we're just introducing more information that the public will now just be hearing for the first time and then unable to comment and we will be taking a vote today. So I just for transparency sake I just don't know that this I'm just con I'm concerned I'm I'm concerned with the new information being submitted how that may appear. That's all. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you member Gallo. Um if Mr. Fine you have anything else you want to ask? >> No I I think from a legal perspective the analysis is still the same. I think the superintendent was just saying something. So I'll allow her to to make a comment if she wants to. Um, thank you, Madam Chair. I'm happy to not do the

007presentation and just do the talking points because these were going to be my talking points based on the fact that there is so much misinformation that has resulted as uh some of the discussion at the previous meeting. So, this was meant as an attempt to capture that information so the board could see it, but we don't I can just speak to it. I don't need we don't need to have a presentation. All right. Thank you, um, Dr. Vasquez. So, with that, uh, since I wasn't here last week, I thought I I pushed my button and I'm going to take the liberty of making a few comments. I did have an opportunity to watch the board's discussion and the public input. I think there are a couple of key factors in my position that we should

008move forward with the language that we have and my reasoning being one when we initiated this it was in 2010. At that time, the board's reason for doing it was because we were looking at having to lose, having to um lay off some of the positions that supported arts and supported athletics and supported those things. And that's what we took out to the public because that's what we needed at that time. We have continued to maintain those positions that were funded by those dollars because each time we've gone out for a referendum, we've still um have still had the support of the public and we have used referendum dollars as they have grown to support additional salaries uh not additional salaries but increases in salaries. So, our situation is vastly different than the other counties

009we've been referring to and the union's been referring to. They want to know why we can't do what Miami Dade did and what Broward did. And the answer is very simple. At the time that Miami Dade and Broward went out was in 2018. At that time, they had already let go of the positions that we held on to in 2010. They did not make the same decision. They made a decision to levy that so that they could raise salaries, not maintain salaries. We are consistent with what we initially did. And we can't do what they did because they let go of those positions. Because our class size and the programs that we are able to provide is what we pledged to our citizens. and to now eliminate those because we now want to offer raises

010which I think we all know we really should not be offering raises with a funding source that is non guaranteed for recur reoccurring. Um I in addition to that I I am concerned that if we put language in that says we will raise salaries. We do not know that we will be able to raise salaries every year. When I was at the county, one of the early votes um that our board wanted to vote on was the use of TDT dollars. We had the tourist development tax. We had a steady growth and the comproller gave her projections for conservative growth an uh a medium or expected growth and a high level of growth. I think her conservative growth was either three or five percent. I honestly was a gasast because in my opinion a conservative

011growth was not a growth at all but a decline because that was certainly possible. As hard as it is to believe is those of us sit here know that the legislature could reduce our funding rather than holding it flat. And if they do that we will be dipping into these dollars in order to stay the course. So if we put down that we are going to raise salaries and we don't have more money, we have less money, we will not be able to uphold our commitment. The language we have right now says these are the things that we can do. We do not guarantee that we can raise salaries, but there's nothing that prevents us from raising salaries. So, I will not support any language that I can't guarantee we can do. Nor will I

012support any language that will go against what we did in 2010 and cause us to have to look at positions that we have and lose some of the valuable programs and the class size that we maintain. With that, I'll call a member bird. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Dr. Vasquez. So just a a a point of clarification. Um since the presentation would have been part of my comments, public comment would already have taken place. So I question whether board member Gallow's point is valid. >> Um thank you, Madam Chair. I was just bringing up a point of order to clarify it and the general counsel said he did not believe that's the point of a point of order is to get clarification and to get recommendations from the legal. He gave his recommendations. >> I don't.

013>> So, so I'm going to proceed then with >> Yes. All right. So, sure. >> Since procedurally I want to make sure we do this correctly, we did we tabled this on the 12th. So we can we move to bring it back off the table so it's technically in front of you. >> Yes. Can I have a motion to pull it off the table? >> Motion by member Ferrant, second by member Bird. All in favor of the motion to pull it off the table and bring it to the board for consideration and a vote. Please say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Dr. Vasquez, you're recognized. Uh thank you. Um so what I uh propose uh to do in the next few minutes is number one uh give a brief history of the

014special millillage and the chair you you captured what I was going to say the original intent of our millillage was to preserve positions that would have had to been cut because of the recession and the other districts that did not have the millillage cut positions at that time. Uh you are also going we have continued to hear why Miami Dade why Broward are able to do that. What you are going to hear is that number one um Miami date and Broward do bring in a significantly larger sum of money as part of the millillage. Uh number two, what you're going to see, which goes to what we have been saying over and over again, there is one pot of money. We have positions at the schools that would need to be cut. Not all, but

015cut because the millillage that support the dollars from the millillage that support these positions would no longer be available if the language were to be changed. you're going to see that uh both Miami Dade and Broward have significantly fewer positions outside of the classroom. So, many of our schools have deans, have resource teachers. Uh those positions are not as prevalent in those two districts. And then lastly, you're going to see that they also have larger class size ratios specifically at the elementary middle of one of the I think we're closer at the high school level. So just doing simple math, if you were to uh right-size with their um class size average and we would say two teachers on the conservative side from every school, that's right there. That's over 400 positions just with aligning

016to their class size averages. Now, the board could choose to have the dollars all go to salary increases, but please make no mistake in thinking that it is not going to result in positions at the school level being cut, being terminated. What does that mean? It means we may not have deans. We may not have resource teachers. We may have schools sharing art teachers and music teachers in order to make the dollars that are being eliminated from the mill to be absorbed into the general fund. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to um Scott Howitt and Dorene Conalino who will um walk us through um the the short presentation. Thank you, Dr. Vz. Madam Chair, thank you. Um, I'm going to walk through the special millage timeline, just give an overview, and

017I know uh, Madam Chair, you did a great job um, kind of walking through that and and and Superintendent Vasquez, I'll I'll go through a little bit of detail just on the numbers as well. So, the one mill operating uh, levy was first brought to voters in 2010, right in the middle of the recession when the district was seeing significant declines in funding. Over the prior three years, OCPS had lost about $500 per student, adding up to roughly $140 million combined between state and local revenue. 100 million state, 40 million local revenue. Voters approved the levy and it went into effect in July of 2011. The additional funding made a real difference. It helped the district to hold on to teachers while other districts were laying off teachers. It kept the arts and athletic programs

018in place and continued supporting student activities across all schools. Without it, the district would have had to make major cuts just to balance the budget. The referendum was renewed for four years in November of 2014 and went into effect in July of 2015, allowing the district to continue supporting the operating budget, protect academic programs, and maintain instructional staffing levels. Just to summarize, to give you a little overview, from 2008 to 2011, per student funding had decreased by $500 or 7%. July. In July of 2010, our special millage was one of the first in the state. Other districts were dealing with massive layoffs post recession. And in July of 2011, our one mill was used to maintain staffing levels, support teachers, arts, and athletics. The second renewal went to voters in August of 2018 and took

019effect in July of 2019. This continued to support and uh to support and allow the district to maintain investments in teacher retention and recruitment as well as the arts, athletics, and student activities. The third renewal, which is the current one, was approved by voters in August of 2022 and runs from July 2023 through June 2027. It continues to support the district's operating budget, including compensation for teachers and support staff while also funding key positions that are critical to maintaining uh strong school programs. One important point to note is that the third renewal, the district began separating funds specifically allocated to recurring compensation increases. This was done to provide greater transparency, making it easier to clarify or to clearly identify the portion of the 1 mill revenues dedicated to supporting ongoing salary increases. Now, I'll turn

020it over to Dorene to continue with the budgeted piece. >> Good afternoon. This chart highlights the important role that 1 mill funding plays in our overall budget. We use 2007 as a baseline because it was the last year before the state began reducing funding per student. When you look across this 18-year period, funding has increased over time. However, the district still has less purchasing power today than it did in 2007 due to inflation. The line above the bars represents the impact of annual increases in the consumer price index or CPI applied to the 2007 funding level. It shows that FEFP funding has not kept pace with rising costs even when we include 1 mil revenues. We remain below where funding would be if it had simply kept up with inflation. At current levels, the district

021has approximately $1,374 less in purchasing power per student than in July 2007. One thing to note is that although we began receiving the 1 mill in July of 2011, state funding had reached its lower lowest level with a reduction of more than $1,000 per student since 2007. Without the one mill, the impact on the budget would be significant, affecting not only overall operations, but also the programs we offer, staffing levels, and the compensation we are able to provide to employees. This year, the 1 mill is expected to generate $242 million. The majority of that, around 170 million, goes directly to staffing in our schools. That includes over,00 instructional positions along with art teachers in areas like music, drama, dance, and the arts and athletic coaches and trainers who support student programs. The district also pays

022for recurring staff compensation increases out of the 1 mil. This includes 19.7 million towards the 9% recurring salary increase in fiscal year 24, 9.2 2 million towards a 2% recurring salary increase in fiscal year 25 and in the current year 13 million towards a 3.65% recurring salary increase for a cumulative total of $42 million. Funding for arts and athletic supplements are also paid from the one mill referendum dollars, including orchestra director, band director, visual arts sponsor, performing arts sponsor, athletic director, athletic trainer, baseball assistant, etc. This is just to name a few. In total, 7 million of these revenues are budgeted for supplements. Also, 3 million cover field trips, including those to the Dr. Philips Center for the Performing Arts to attend grade level ballet and music performances as well as individual school trips where

023some venues may charge program fees. And finally, a portion of these funds is shared with charter schools based on their weighted FTE proportionate share. This year, that amount is projected to be over $20 million. This slide compares what the one mill generates in Orange County versus Miami Dade and Broward. As we know, these revenues are driven by property values. While all three districts levy levy 1 mill for operating purposes, the amount generated varies significantly. Miami Dade receives more than double the revenues generated by our district and Broward generates over 90 million more than Orange. When you look at it on a per student basis, Orange generates $191 less per student than Broward and $59 less per student than Miami Dade. Despite receiving less funding per student, Orange County invests significantly more in non-classroom instructional positions

024like social workers, school psychologists, and school counselors. In fact, we fund over a thousand more positions than Broward and over 500 more than Miami date. For additional context, we've also included average teacher salaries based on the Florida Department of Education data. As you can see, Orange's average salary is higher than both Broward and Miami Day. When we put it all together, the takeaway is this. Orange is operating with less funding per student while supporting more positions in his schools and still maintaining higher average teacher salaries than the districts we're being compared to. This class size comparison shows how many students per one teacher. Building on the previous slide where we saw that Orange County generates less from the one mill but funds more non-classroom instructional positions and has an higher average teacher salary. Now let's

025take a look at the class size formulas. What this shows is consistent with the same pattern. Orange maintains a lower student to teacher, excuse me, teacherto student ratio over overall, which means fewer students per teacher and more manageable workloads compared to Miami Dade and Broward. So when you step back and take a look at it all together, the picture becomes pretty clear. Orange is operating with less one mill funding while at the same time investing more in instructional staffing and maintaining smaller class sizes. One way to measure efficiency is administrative costs per student. According to the most recent report issued by the Florida Department of Education, OCPS has the lowest administrative cost per student among the seven large urban school districts. and were 12th lowest of the 67 districts in the state. In conclusion, previous

026boards invested in school-based instructional positions, not salary supplements. Offering supplements comparable to districts such as Miami Date and Broward is achievable. Reducing positions to fund these supplements would be a board priority and does not require a change to the referendum language. It simply requires the board to prioritize this effort alongside other alongside other budget pressures. Dr. Vasquez. >> Uh thank you uh Dorene. And um Dorene is there obviously because of the budget. Um I did ask Scott to speak because of his legislative uh background and his history with the mill. Um he's he's the one that has the most um history and firsthand knowledge. Uh just want to iterate a few things. Number one, there is no doubt that our teachers deserve more money and so do our support staff. No one is arguing that.

027We are 50th in the nation. They deserve better compensation. Um if the board wants to revisit how the dollars are being used um in the referendum, you can ask us to revisit our model. Miami Dade, Broward, um Palm Beach, I'm think Hillsboro as well, not positive about Hillsboro have a completely different site model. um they are given units or positions and as you can see from this they focus on classroom teachers not a lot of positions outside they primarily have uh media specialists guidance counselor uh psychologist uh but we're happy to do that we're happy to go back work with Miami Dade and Broward see what that funding model looks like for schools, but there will be cuts to positions. These districts cut during the recession. The previous board's priority was to maintain those positions.

028So, in order for us to be able to do um what Miami and Broward, that is going to require a readjustment of allocations at the school level. It is my opinion that the board can give direction to do that without changing the language in the referendum because that's simply a budgetary a budgetary ask and our team will go to work and be able to provide you with what that actually means um from a school uh perspective. Um uh with I I also want to remind us and those that are listening, we met three times as part of the legislative committee. Everyone agreed that salaries increases were a priority. We also weighed the loss, the potential loss of these positions if we would go with the 1.25 25 mil as opposed to just the 1 mil.

029And we decided that we would go for the 1 mil and in two years go out for the 0.25 that would go strictly to salary increases. Uh and so I'm um I'm happy to hear uh the board's direction if you would like for us to revisit that funding model. But if you vote to change the language so that it only goes to salary increases, we will have to readjust staffing. And that staffing is at the school level. And it's not a couple, it will be hundreds of positions that will um be lost as you could see from the chart we display. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you, Superintendent. Member Bird, you're recognized. Thank Thank you, chair. Um, I'm gonna just go ahead and go with my original Oh my gosh, my phone worst time.

030Sorry. Um, with my original comments, um, the the presentation didn't change my opinion. It just solidified what I already knew. So, um, I want to just say, well, actually the chair already said as well some of my comments. Basically, I was going to talk about the reason we initially did the um the one mill and the board at that time, their insistence on not cutting um staff and how that's different than what these other districts these other districts didn't do that at the time. It was um but the biggest thing that we have to understand and this is where I think what I keep what I feel like keeps getting missed from the conversation is that over these last you know 20 years or yeah it's been 20 years since the recession the funding hasn't

031come back and you know when you look at our state as a whole this is this is the other problem okay with even with a growing state budget and I've heard members of this board talk about how the money is there in the state they're the percentage of the budget that they're allocating towards education is down to 45%. Where it used to be in the 80s you have to understand 1980s it was 60%. of the state's budget went to education, all levels of education, K12, universities, education, because the state at that time, you can say what you want to say, but the state then believed education was important and it deserved 60% of our state budget, right? Well, since that time, for whatever reason, it's declined, declined, declined, and it's never come back from the

032recession. So, it doesn't matter. Um if let's see I I'm just gonna go I'm just gonna read what I wrote because if I try to even emotions get in the way and so I'm just going to read um what I what I prepared was this this drop in the state funding um did not indicate a shortage of resources. You have to be clear about that. For 2026, the state budget comprised of all comprised of all the funds increased 20%. Our state budget increased 20% but yet this year they're saying teachers salaries only deserve 65 of 1%. That's where the anger and that's where the emails and that's where the social media posts need to be angry. That we have a state budget that grew by 20% or $19 billion this past year, but they can

033only they're still paying teachers at a the 50th lowest rate in the entire nation. That's the problem. It's not what we're doing here because everything that was just shared in that presentation shows that even with all of that, Orange County is has still managed to give consistent raises has still managed to drain the reserves pay keeping health care costs manageable all these years. has still managed to keep all of these positions in our schools that everyone continuously says are important. In fact, we went to go cut one position this year and we've gotten completely devastated with um concerns about that one position. Imagine if we come back to them and we have to cut other positions. Um, the state legislature no longer believes in or values public education anyway you cut it. They just don't.

034They believe in choice, which is fine. I I understand that. They believe that voters should be able to take their money and go wherever they want for education. That's fine. This referendum is more important than ever and doing anything to risk that is completely counterproductive. Email campaigns, social media posts that cast any doubt in voters minds that this funding is being used exactly for what it's intended to do is just plain, sorry, stupid. when $170 million is going directly to compensating teacher positions and over 90% of our referendum is going to salaries. It's just dumb to do anything to risk it. Um so that's that's where my anger is coming in about everything that's going on right now with this. Now, I want to talk about in changing the word increasing. When we talk about

035I'm going to tell you why I don't support changing the word to increasing, even though I believe with all my heart and passion that teachers deserve way more than what they're getting paid. By putting that word increasing in this referendum, we're committing future boards to do just that, regardless of what happens with this economy. This is what I heard some people say. Well, we get more money every year from the referendum. The referendum goes up every year. Okay. Yeah, we have been. We're very lucky that, you know, the economy's been kind of steady. Home prices have gone up. We can't say that that's always going to be that way. In fact, there's a whole growing group of people that believe that we could see a complete economic downturn with AI. AI taking over jobs. There

036could be huge job loss. Who knows? We cannot say that. That's the point. And if we put the word increasing into the one mill language, then we're binding the hands of future boards that they have to find a way to increase. Let's just say that 1 mil comes in with less money and we don't have an increase in money. And we obviously cannot count on the state for an increase in money, then what? Then we're going to have to find an increase because that language is in our one mill. Um I uh okay so with that not one of us sitting up here I think can guarantee that the referendum money will increase every year. That's not an increase. So I'm as a board member I I feel very passionately that I will refuse to

037tie the hands of future boards to have to do something that that I cannot promise that they will be able to fulfill. So that's why I will not be supporting changing language today and I will be supporting keeping the language just as it is because we have done a terrific job in this county of maintaining positions, giving our students terrific choices and um continually working on raising teacher salaries every year and keeping the costs away from them, the raises and healthcare and everything else um as way away from them as long as we Thank you. >> Thank you, Member Bird. Member Font. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, thank you, Member Bird, for your comments and thoughts on this. Um, I think it will be um everything I say will be just kind of a

038um adding to what you just said, uh, I agree that teachers should be paid better, right? I think all of us up here feel the same way. We want to make sure they're one of the most vital positions. Um everything in life that we learn and do all came from um teachers that are pouring into our kids and helping them. Um but this was thank you Dr. Vasquez for creating this um presentation. I was able to um speak with the team um just this week and just understanding more of it and just digging in. I had a lot of questions. Um there was a graph that we received uh that had just showed um some of the breakdowns and you know staff compensation increase those types of um wording and just trying to understand it

039more. And so, uh, some of the takeaway from that conversation really helped me understand when we're talking about the staff compensation increase of the 42 million, um, that was on page five of the presentation. Um, that is for the raises that we have given over the last several years. Um, the 9%, the uh, 2%, the 3.65% 65%. Um those are um I might have those raises wrong, but those are incredible percentages um of what we were what we have given to teachers over the last several years. Um and it shows that we do want to help our teachers. At one point we were um I believe we tried to even out some of the gap between your what we pay a a beginning teacher and then um some of our senior teachers, the veteran teachers

040that have been with us forever. Um but I think what what I'll reiterate here is everything that you see there's a one pot of money. you have one pot and if we do not raise the taxes which I will never be in favor of. So I just I need to make that very clear even in two years as it sounds great to receive more funding but I would never be in favor of that because I don't think that the voters want to pay more in taxes. Everyone is scraping as is so that we have one pot of money. the funds are, excuse me, are not increasing. And so if we have one pot of money and we say we're going to increase teacher pay, if we increase here, something's going to have to give over

041here. And on this side, our arts, music, athletics, the field trips are incredible. My kids still talk about their uh second grade field trip to um to the see the orchestra or going to the Dr. Phillips Center and seeing a ballet. Um these are opportunities that many kids would never have except that they receive this now at school. This is amazing opportunities um that so something would have to give. If we didn't give any of this, let's say we continue with our um arts, music, athletics, and we would want to increase teacher pay, then we need to go into our other budget and figure out, well, where would we get it from there? And as member Bird mentioned, we have had to eliminate a position because the funding isn't there. So, we're deciding, okay, where

042where can we um eliminate uh some positions and we did that and it was a a small number of positions and a huge outcry. Um so I can't imagine if we start uh cutting other positions but there are some that um I mean I will say that as a board member I will be very uh intentional of you know looking through with a fine tooth comb where are there areas where we could save dollars where are there areas maybe even here at the district that maybe there's some I know we've cut 3% but maybe there are some areas that they have maybe over staffing or whatever it is but that is something that you can guarantee that I will continue with that but as that is again what Dr. Vasquez said we can direct Dr.

043Vasquez and the staff to continue looking for those areas that would not directly impact a school. So I think that's what I all of us are at least for myself I want to make sure that the schools aren't impacted. Um but again we can't have um a headless monster here and we have just schools operating and doing their thing and no one is here at the district level. We have to have a head. We have to have people directing and guiding and supporting our schools. Um, so with all of that said, I just will continue to, as I said on Tuesday, I will continue to look and see where we can help our teachers and find those dollars. But in with this referendum, I would not support putting the word increasing pay because we cannot

044guarantee that every year you could increase the pay and that is my take on it. Thank you. >> Thank you member for memberos. >> Thank you madam chair. I just have a couple of questions. Do we have an oversight committee that much like our half penny sales tax oversees the use of the funds we bring in? Do we have that for the 1 mill? >> No, we do not. >> Okay. But if I if I may add, um those dollars are rolled into the operating budget. Ultimately, the board does approve the operating budget. Um and we are audited every year. >> No, I I I get that. And and I think that's part of the problem with this conversation is on the one hand we're trying to separate the one mill, but on the other

045hand, it's really part of the operating budget. Um, but I do think that having I mean I've had many many people ask me this question and so I I think it is important to have some kind of group or committee group that can see where the funds are coming in and see where the money's going. I I I I so I would support that first and foremost. Um language >> though I hear what you're saying. Um I also do want to acknowledge member Gallow's comments about um receiving this overview right before the meeting. I do think this would is something important that our community would want to have seen. Um so I just want to acknowledge that I I agree and I I I wish that we had gotten this earlier. Um I also um

046received an email. Um I think we all did and I think some of the questions that were asked in the email were were not answered directly in the response. So I just wanted to ask those questions. Um, one of the questions was, um, how can OCPS realistically compete with the voucher program? Well, basically, if if the one mill doesn't pass, does OCPS plan to cut athletics, arts, and music programs? Um, if the one mill does not pass, our uh team will put together recommendations for the board uh to help guide what cuts would take place. Um, one of uh what one of the points I made is that um I we may not cut um all of the arts, but it may be that um certain schools may have to share. It may happen um

047uh on maybe a semester basis. Uh and it may not be that we look at cutting the arts. It may be that we look at cutting some of those extra positions that are outside of the classroom. Um additionally, we um would, and I know this is not popular, none of this is popular, but we would revisit the assistant principles. we would re we are currently revisiting um the cadre model and uh seeing if we were to reduce even further um what those supports would would look like. We are analyzing uh the positions that are funded from um grants. Uh and although those cannot be used for for salaries, but are there things that can be taken out of the general fund, put into some of the grants that would release more general fund dollars. Uh

048but um cuts would not be a decision that we make um alone. we would bring recommendations uh to the board. Uh, additionally, we probably would look at increasing the um class size averages because that is one way that you may be able to streamline and then continue some of those support services um that um not only help our our children but support our staff as well. >> Okay. Thank you. I have another question on something you just said, but I guess what I'm trying to understand is it when I read the one mill language, it sounds like it's protecting the arts and the um you know, the arts and the athletics, but it it sounds like if it went away, I mean, it's just not clear to me exactly. It just seems like this money

049is very fuzzy. like I is it is it protecting the arts and athletics or is it not? And and if it is, I mean, I I do sort of have questions about whether that language should even be in here because why why would we specifically I understand why this was initially passed with this language, but moving forward, why are we carving out certain teachers and programs at the ex, you know, and not others? And and the the strange thing is when this was first passed, maybe the arts and the athletics were the mo the more sort of like vulnerable piece because the one mill was more vulnerable, but now I would actually say the entire situation is flipped and now the funding from the state is actually more variable and unreliable than the funds from

050the one mill. So, I don't know what my question is there, but I I sort of wonder like why we we have a group that we are I guess stating that we're protecting even though I'm not really sure we are when I feel like it should be more equal. Uh so the positions that um have been listed are funded uh through the 1 mill and that was done back in 2010 when we were looking at what positions would be cut as a result of the recession. Right? So, uh, art and, uh, music as well as you see that term highly qualified. Those are the, uh, positions that would have been eliminated or could have been eliminated, um, if the board had either the mill didn't pass or the board, um, didn't want to take on

051um, continuing with those positions. At the end of the day, and I hear what you're saying, we have committed to the arts and we've committed to highly qualified teachers. At the end of the day, it's one pot. So whether you are saying, "Well, we're going to keep the arts because that's something we know is valuable. It keeps children in our schools, but you're going to have to cut other positions to make Do you see what I'm saying?" So you're you're right. You could you could um say well we can fund science teachers or we can fund AP teachers but at the end of the day I hope the entire board has seen that there is only one pot of money and positions would need to be cut and if that's what we need to do

052because teacher salaries are not acceptable we we will follow through with that. I just I have heartburn when people believe that we have the money and there's going to be no impact, no cuts at the school level. That is not true. >> Um, additionally, I think it's a great idea. We could have a committee that looks at um the expenditures for um the the 1 mill. We're very transparent about that and would even welcome if there's expertise on how we may be able to um find alternative sources or if there's a better return on investment. Absolutely. Great idea. But the public needs to understand, and I think that message has been lost, that if we're going to give teachers and support staff additional raises, right, supplements from the 1 mill, there's got to be cuts

053to positions. And it's going to be won't be all of the art music positions, but there will be hundreds of positions that need to be cut in order for us to be able to uh fund that that increase. I also thought it was ironic that we have a higher average salary than either Miami Dade or Palm Beach. again demonstrating >> the priority this board has continued to have. We want to be able to pay our teachers more. Uh and if that means going back and looking at a different site model, we we don't have a problem doing that. But we want to be transparent that people don't come back like what happened with one of the positions we decided to cut. We need them. we need them. Well, 80 positions is nothing compared to what

054we are looking at and we haven't even gotten into what the request is. Uh but it will be hundreds of positions that will need to be cut um at the school level. >> Thank you. Um, and you know, I it's funny. I was thinking back to when the the 9% I think it was a 9% salary increases when they happened a couple of years ago. Um, I was thinking the other day, well, instead of doing that, like why didn't we use that money flexibility to, you know, maybe move some of these positions that are funded through the mill and instead kind of use the um the millillage for bonuses and and supplements for our teachers. But then I was remembering when I sat right there and then back there and I was listening to the

055conversation and what I remember teachers saying was you can't bring a bonus or supplement when you're going to go to get a loan or to go to get your mortgage. And um the preference that I understood at that time was that was for a salary versus money out of the mill as a bonus or supplement. And maybe I'm remembering that wrong, but >> no, you're correct. Um, >> so I mean I guess that's that's the trade-off. I mean I I've had many many emails and people saying why can't you do what Broward did? Well, I called my friend who's on the Broward school board and I mean first of all they had to cut a thousand positions and they're planning to cut a thousand positions over the next two, you know, each year for the

056next two years. So first of all, there's that. And also what this person shared was that they're yes, the teachers are getting the bonuses and supplements through the 1 mill, but if the 1 mil were to go away, that's gone. Like there it's not in their it's not in the base salary. So those teachers aren't protected. There's no protection for them. They lose all of that extra bonus money if that one mill goes away. And I don't want that for our teachers. I do want to make sure that they have ever so slowly as it's increasing and it's disgusting. It's not enough. Our teachers don't make a nearly enough money, but at least if it's in the salary, that's better than um a supplement or a bonus that you can't necessarily rely on. Um you

057know, and I, you know, reached out to a friend on Pasco County. They cut 180 positions. Sarasota, 260 positions, including 180 teachers. Um, Bvard's having a 7% workforce reduction. Um, you know, Semol's going through it, too. And so, I I'm really torn because I want our teachers to have a some guarantee, you know, to to have an increase and to see this mill as a way to have an increase bonus or or supplement. And, you know, we say what we're going to do in two years for the 0.25, 25, but there's no guarantee that we'll pass a board. So, I'm worried that we're not going to have that. But at the same time, you know, I also want our teachers to be protected, too. So, I'm just trying to articulate my thoughts um and put

058out there the things that I'm weighing in my mind as to reaching the right decision. Um, so see if I had another question before I let other people speak. Um, oh, I also I I do think and I support um looking at having a centralized control of the school budgets um in order to bring more money in to pay our teachers. I I absolutely support investig investigating that and um and using that to increase our teacher pay. Um, and then of course I will always say that with maybe the exception of some programs for ELLL and students with disabilities, I also support cutting edtech uh software programs as well for a million or two there. So I'm just putting it out there as trying to offer other ways and I will wait to hear from

059the rest of my members. Thank you. >> Thank you, member Vanos. And um as far as sharing the dilemma and the tough pros and cons, I I appreciate that and I think it is always helpful for us to understand not just what I think or what any of us think, but why we think that way. So, thank you for taking the time. Um, I know that doesn't mean you have an answer, but you've certainly got all the questions that are um I think in everybody's mind. All right, let me call on member Salamanca. >> I'm sorry, Member Felder. Oh, that's because you already deleted your name. I'm sorry, Member Felder. Thank you so much. Um this is indeed uh I think member Veron said it last time kind of engaging conversations we're having on the

060board. I just want to share a couple of things. Last night I had the opportunity to attend the Metro Conference athletic banquet. I'd never gone. and to see those children and the uh the efforts that they made in their accomplishments in their their sport. Remember Vano, she would have been tickled pink. Winter Park was off the chain. And this girl that plays volleyball, my girlfriend is a referee. When I mentioned Winter Park, she immediately knew who I was talking about. That chick going to be Summit Appalachia. You know, she's going to be something else. and the thought of having to cut if we decide to go with the um 1.25 25 other than the onepoint meal because we're looking at the salary increases in another way to not have children have the opportunity to have

061coaches there to work them to their fullest potential because we can't afford to have the programs in the school. Many children come to school because of the sports, because of the arts, because of the culinary, because of all these extra things that we are still able to do. It would be just I can't imagine. And I sort of looked at um my district if we were to go with 1.25 25. Um, I'm due to lose 269 plus students in my district. I mean, uh, not students, I'm sorry, teachers. That's a lot. And then I looked at the fact that if we did do a 1.25 mill, it's a they did the survey, it's like 56 to 41. Okay. But if we kept the one meal, the survey showed us 70 to 29. Because I am

062not sure of what the state would give us in a budget. I know there were I remember when member Bird talked about the 60%. I mean, everybody was gung-ho with public education and look like each year it gets smaller and smaller. And I would advocate that those persons that lobby for policemen and firemen, they should get behind education because it's people when a people that are police officers and uh firemen, they have to make life and death decisions to kill somebody to save somebody from a fire. And if the mindset of that person to make that life and death decision is not right because there were not enough teachers or qualified teachers to help mold their minds, we got a problem. So we need to do all that we can to keep qualified teachers and

063be able to continue to uh give them some type of salary increase. We need people to join us. To join us because I'm telling you Nelson Mandela talked about the fact that having an education that is the number one priority to help you live a successful life, whatever you choose to do. And so I am very concerned about teacher salary because I'm a teacher and my mother used to tell me stuff and I would just laugh at her. She said, "If I had the kind of money you were making," and this is my first year teaching. I made $800 a month, $400 and something dollars every two weeks. My mother said, "If she had made that amount of money, I can't imagine living like that." But if we start messing with not being able to

064help our teachers and depending just and the state continues to do what they're doing because I'm I'm understanding that we got one pot. One pot and then all of that money they said one pot we have to div out. And I'm just so concerned they people talking about it's politics. I'm so sick of hearing that word about politics. Just do what's right. If we have to pull everything out of that one bucket of money, I I'm just afraid in what it's going to look like. 28 I shudder to think was going to look like 2930 what it's going to look like if if if the the trend has not changed. So, while we know that people have voted for the onepoint meal and you got a 70 to 29 ratio, that's that's more comfortable to

065me than uh the chance of a 5641. And I'm not a math person. I'm an actress. I'm a theater person. And so I I I'm just going to contend with what I know, what I believe was what we discussed on in those three meetings. I'm going to hold fast until I can see something differently and I don't see it right now to the one point meal. Thank you. >> Thank you, member member Felder. And uh up next is member Salamanca. >> Thank you, chair. Um I remember uh I think that's probably the worst budget time for OCPS when I was in the classroom, right? I remember in 2010 the official hard caps of class size kicked in and there were these enormous budget deficits that the district had. Um, I think out of my seven

066periods, five of them, there was over 35 kids in them. I mean, we were sitting on top of each other's desks to be in these classrooms. It was one, incredibly disruptive as as a as a student. Two, our teachers were so stressed. I I mean they it was so much work per teacher in addition to what was even and I remember obviously class size being a whole whole debate on its own. But um you know this is it it just reminds me a lot of of that and really how hard it was um just to not have the money to just have normal amount of students in each class. And I really actually appreciate the data that was given to us about the studenttoteer ratio. Um cuz it man have we've come a long way

067since I graduated from OCPS. Uh it that was absolutely not a ratio I think I experienced the last two years at Timber Creek. Um, but you know, I I I want to say something I think all of us share. Uh, and we're all coming from the exact same belief, which is that every teacher in OCPS should be able to stay in this pession, should be able to raise a family, feel like their job provides. Um, and we take this very seriously. You know, I've heard from teachers who we've all heard from them and in emails and who've come to speak to us who are thinking about taking a second job, who don't think that they can stay in this job. Um, and of course I I really do carry a lot of that. And you

068what what we're talking about here is not should teachers get paid more. It's about what adding certain language to a ballot language does. Um, and and I understand a lot of the anger, man. I mean, I've I've been called many things this week. Uh, I won't repeat on social media. Uh, and I'm not going to pretend it doesn't sting because it does. We're all we're all human and not no one here has actually bad intentions no matter what social media tells us that we do. Um and it's hard uh to sit with those comments because I think a moment in a vote like this it doesn't ever stop bothering you to take a vote like this. It is it is heavy and it is hard. Um and I don't think anyone on this board takes

069it lightly. Um and I understand the anger. Um but I mean you can replace me as a board member. Uh but you cannot replace a thousand teaching positions overnight and you cannot replace what happens to those people's lives. Um I would rather uh absorb all the anger that I have gotten in social media the past couple weeks and and awful things have been said about me um than make a promise that costs so many their job over the next couple of years. Um it really is not a vote about what teachers deserve. Um they absolutely deserve more. Um, but with this sentence, we're adding a sentence to ballot language that is written in a way that is hoping that there's no economic downturn. We're saying no matter what happens out there, we're going to increase

070teacher salaries and in the near future, right, over the next four years. There's we handcuff this board and the leadership and governance of of this district to make any adjustment to that. And so the risk is not that a paycheck is stagnant over a recession. And we saw that in a way. I remember a teacher saying we haven't gone a raise in a really long time when the recession came. But they were very grateful to have a job. And the option was not, hey, I promise you that we're going to increase your salary no matter what, but actually some of you will lose your jobs because that's the only way that the math works. It really is a math problem. Um and I just cannot vote for a language that makes that scenario more likely.

071Um you know we talked about how how many positions uh is funded through the one mill. um th those are just like individuals in those classrooms, right? And god forbid property values fall and this shrinks or god forbid that projections are what they say they're going to be on enrollment are actually worse than it says on enrollment which means our revenue drops from the state. God forbid both things happen at the exact same time where property values fall with our enrollment, which that was something that did not happen in 2008 because we were still growing and we were still building like crazy. Not responsibly clearly, but we were building and we were growing. People were moving to Florida. Um, and so it's not quite a hypothetical. And I think I I I ran some numbers,

072right, that if we do modest a 15% dip in property values, a 15% dip in property values. Back in ' 08, it was a 50% dip. Um, and a 5% in drum in Drummond, Rob over the next four years as well. That can be in the upper hundred million of lost revenue to this district. So we would be looking at a minus $und00 million in revenue and we would be looking at a ballot that we all committed to fund an increase every year of salaries and somehow we say the math doesn't add up of why we have to cut because right now I mean I I'm of this board who inherited past board's decisions not to cut health care costs and we are in the biggest hole and we have to make really hard decisions

073on healthare cost that we're inheriting it. It's not it's more painful today than it's ever going to be. And what I see this vote as being is I'm going to do the exact same thing where I'm just going to make this promise of we just keep kicking the can of these big expenses hoping nothing happens that revenue isn't going to drop that costs are going to be the same and then have some other board be on the hook for actually figuring out where to find the cuts and it the cuts are going to come either at the expense I think that was the exact wording member is used. Maybe we have the teach like the arts and the athletics. Is that really at the expense of others? Maybe. But yeah, increasing any part of this

074is at the expense of something else that that's just the way it works. Um so, you know, I I you know, I I'm not okay with hollowing out the arts or the athletics or any activities that fund any of this. I think parents who have choices whether that's a charter or private or vouchers are going to start looking around because it is super clear to me from emails I've gotten from talking to parents that one of the reasons why they continuously pick OCPS is because of the investment that this past boards have made on the millillage to invest in the arts and athletics and they believe that OCPS is incredibly nationally competitive because of the type of a programs that we have. And these are not just programs that we're funding on field trips, right?

075These are positions of programs that we're funding. Um, I think ultimately I don't want this district to lose the credibility of every future ask that we make of those voters because I think that if god forbid these numbers end up being the enrollment drops or property values drop and the increase in salary ends up eating up majority of the millage or a whole another bucket of the general fund that we are on the hook. look for and we have to cut these programs. I think the voters will come back and say, "I voted for a millillage that has the arts and sports and what do you mean that this is being cut?" I mean, the emails that we've gotten for the safe positions, I think it's going to be 10 times that. And I think

076next time we go to the ballot and ask for whatever the increased millage is or the 0.25, the voters are going to say that we did not stick to the things that we said. we're going to lose the credibility from the voters who have supported us and giving us money and they'll say, "I gave you money. I appro approved to extend this or I actually approved to increase this and my kid doesn't have a coach anymore and my kid doesn't have an arts program anymore even though my kid loves that. I I will not do that to a future board." Um, and so that that's kind of what I'm voting for. I'm voting for what keeps enrollment up. I'm voting for what makes the math work. Um, and I'm voting so that the voters of

077Orange County continue to trust that we're going to fund the things that they have prioritized and that it's protecting the things that we have always put in the millillage. Um, I do think that if if members of this board want to discuss the actual buckets of this, the percentage that goes into this, I think we absolutely have the toolkit to do that. But handcuffing this and saying we're going to mandate that we will increase teacher salaries every year. That's that's that's very different because if we are ever looking at a negative hund00 million which is a very reasonable assumption of stress test we're going to find a hund00 million somewhere else and it's not going to be pretty and so that's that's going to be my vote. Thank you. >> Thank you very much Alamanca.

078Member Gallo. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I appreciate everybody's comments today and I I 100% understand that we only have one pot of money and I don't any way or fashion think that we're hiding money. I know as a district I don't believe that we're hiding money. Um, are we utilizing the money to the best of our ability and the most efficient way that we can? I think that's something that we can explore. Um, I also spoke to friends in Broward. I probably spoke to the same person Stephanie did. I also spoke um to Miami Dade. Both places have arts, athletics in all their schools. They have they're not doing a rotation. They have all the same things that we do. And if you look at the referendum and how the referendums are laid

079out, none of them have just the referendum going to teacher um supplements. I mean, none of them do. It it varies, but like they're they're supporting arts, they're supporting athletics, they're supporting um retention, mental health. Um >> Madame Chair, the mic we're having a hard time hearing. >> I'm sorry. So that they have they've all in their referendum school security they've all added other things than just compensation for the teacher and the educational pair professionals. They've they've all done that and they do have when it comes to arts and athletics because that seems to be at the crest of the angst that I'm hearing from my fellow board members and I agree. kids do come to school and feel comfortable when when they are able to join in something they're passionate about. Whether that's art,

080whether that's music, drama, dance, um lacrosse, football, volleyball, water polo, any of those things do draw people into our schools. I would also argue that the quality of teachers that we have also draws students to OCPS. And I think we've all said at one time or another that a teacher's working environment is absolutely our children's learning environment. So I do have some serious concerns with the raise of the health care and what that means to our teachers. Um I did have town halls where I talked to some were some had more participation than others. Um, but what I kept hearing over and over again from from teachers and those that were my audience is, "I can't afford to pay my bills. I am selling my plasma. I have $250. It'll be $250 a week for

081my child to get must needed therapies. I won't be able to afford that under the new insurance. I'm living paycheck to paycheck. I'm literally going to have to decide between medical or putting food on the table. I'm going to have to decline the medical and see what other avenue I could do. I can't be on OCPS's medical plan because I can't afford it. Um, and we all know what gas prices look like. We all know what it looks like when we go to the grocery store. And I just don't in good conscience I don't know how we don't do something to help the teachers that will literally not all of them because some of them have husbands they can go on their health insurance but a lot of them especially like single mothers will be

082able to afford what we're about to do. I just pulled the numbers for just say you're a you're a mom with kids, single mom, you have kids. Your RX deductible is $1,000 before you get to the co-pay. Your medical deductible is $4,000 and it so that's $5,000 a year. Um mental health is included in that. So you would have to reach your your deductible before if you went past the five EAPS. um your cost is per year is going up by $1,683 and that equates to one thou $134 per paycheck. Um, so this these are real numbers that are going to cause a real hardship on our already cashstrapped teachers and I just don't know how they're going to survive this and I understand the need for us to stabilize our trust fund. We have

083to. We're bleeding money. We can't afford to do it. We can't afford the $145 million for next year. But as I stated at the meeting on Tuesday, that means we're going to have to make some hard choices that none of us want to make. And maybe that does mean looking at everything. I don't want to cut arts, athletics. I don't want to cut positions. I don't want to cut deans, resource teachers, or anything. But when it when it comes to our teachers literally being able to survive in a profession that they love as a single mom and a single mom in order to get two or three jobs, she's got to have daycare for her kids. And we all understand how expensive that is. So it's not just as easy as telling teachers over the

084summer, you got to get up, you got to pick up a couple of jobs. It it's not that easy for our single mothers. And so we need to look at some of the things that Miami date has done. I understand that they don't have as many teachers and I think at the very minimum we need to have that conversation. When I look at the class size comparisons and I'm looking at orange, I promise you these are averages. These are schoolwide averages. They're not that this does not truly dictate what is in our classrooms because I've been in classrooms where it's been 30. I've been in classrooms where it's been six to eight. It's been 30 students because we can't after that October FTE raise it another 5% without getting in trouble. Like and then if

085you look at Miami date and Broward numbers, they're only two off of ours except for at the very end three. Now that may that may not be that the union may not have an appetite for for increasing class size, but something's got to give. We keep saying it's one pot of money. So yes, if we want to give supplements to teachers, we are going to have to look at class size. We are going to have to look at deans and resource teachers and ensure that we're using our money as efficiently. Last time I checked and the last time we did a planning session, Miami's Dade's data was good. It's not like their data is bad. And if they're doing it without deans and resource teachers and their students are still getting high quality education with

086strong student outcomes, then we need we need to look at what they're doing and we need to make difficult decisions. Um I am a little concerned about the recurring costs that we use on raises from the millillage. I didn't I didn't think we were allowed to use those as recurring costs, but in an email that we received, it says a portion of the mill is being used for salary increases. Nonetheless, that means we can't take back the salary, so we're using the millage as a reoccurring cost, which I didn't think was allowed under law, but maybe I'm misunderstood. Um, I understand the flexibility to the district. I would also argue that our teachers absolutely need flexibility in their budgets as well and what we're providing them as of right now and I know we're continuing

087to have that conversation. So I I want to be cognizant of that. I know that what we've offered the union may not be the last pass that we give in health insurance and we're constantly looking ways to reduce um those health care cost that we're providing for our teachers. But I also think that we're going to have to make some hard decisions. I I I just do. I think that we're going to have to look at things that we did in 2010. We're not 2010. We're 2026. And as member Vanos pointed out, we're in a far different place today than we were back in 2010. and we can't keep doing things the way that we did in 2010 and become so dependent on this millillage instead of using it for the supplements that our teacher

088and educational pair professionals need and they deserve. Um I want you know I I agree with an audit. I think we need to audit that and I have I do have a few questions I promise. Um, with that I also like I think when I'm looking at things I'm looking at and these are and I'm just going to throw these out here because they were what came to my mind. It's in no way shape >> a an endorsement on my end to look at these. I'm just looking at things that we overpay for that maybe we need to have hard conversations on so that we could pay our teachers more. We got SRO's. They're costing us $16 million. Deans, coaches, AP. We need to look more thoroughly at some of the avenues that we can

089bring in to generate dollars like cell towers on our property. We can there's there's money there to be made. Um the the counties and the and the municipalities are going to jump on that if we don't. We've discussed stop arms. I understand we have some issues with that, but maybe looking at that revenue stream plus it's it's safe. looking at class size. Um, anything that we can do to really bring more dollars to our frontline employees that are that are really the people that support our students every single day. We need to do with that one pot of money. and maybe even looking at maybe a policy like maybe we do look at a policy and we see how we can break down the millillage in a way that is sufficient and would allow us

090to give more money to teachers. Um, and I understand our our our higher average, we have higher average salaries, but when you add in the supplements that they get down in Miami D, Broward, and Palm Beach, they make a lot more money than our teachers do through those supplements. And I would argue that if there were any teachers in the audience right now, they would take those supplements in a heartbeat because it would still it would allow them to put food on the table and support their family. Um, and I think those days of being choosy between salary and supplements with the way the state gives us money are gone and they're going to take whatever they can. To remember Salamanca's point about 2007208, I remember it well. Yeah, taxes dropped by 50%. But that

091was a housing bubble that should never have happened. And mortgages were given to people who could not afford them. And when they did their, you know, when they did these balloon mortgages and you got to the balloon part, they couldn't afford them and a lot of a lot of stuff went into foreclosure. That's simply not where we are right now. I know that we're on the precipice of of a recession, but we don't know what that looks like. And the polling that we received from the one mill, the thing that pulled the absolute positively highest over everything else we've talked about today was increasing teacher pay. It just was it was like 70%. It it pulled extremely high. And so I think we're discounting that which is why I still support adding the word increase

092or improve. That's more palatable to the board. I don't think any of this is going to go my way, but um or improve to the board because I just I think that our feet do need to be held to the fire so that we find solutions on how to pay our pair professionals and our educators a living wage. I'm not asking that we make them rich. That's we can't do that. We don't have enough money for that. But all I'm advocating for today is to provide a living wage to highly educated teachers so that they don't have to sell their plasma to make ends meet so they're not working two to three jobs and trying to decide if they're going to leave their kids home alone if they can't find someone to watch them because

093they can't afford daycare. These are all real issues, real struggles, and real emails that we've all seen in our inboxes. And so I I feel like that is worth fighting for. And that is why I would support adding that language increase or improve into the ballot language. And I think we could do so without cutting arts and PE and athletics and all those things that other districts continue to have and that do bring in students. Um, and I and I do have a question about the way we broke it down. It's 170 million goes to 1,187 instructional positions. How do we identify which positions they are? And how how do we How do we define and quantify high quality teachers? What does that look like? And I'll give you a series of questions and that

094way you can just answer me once. Um and then staff compensation increase. Is that tied to the raises that we've got done? Is that so that would make that 42 million re reoccurring? And so what happens if we don't get the millillage? We and I didn't think we were supposed to be putting reoccurring dollars embedded within our millillage. um the supplements that seven million are we paying select teachers supplements for arts and athletics above and beyond what they're getting paid with the millillage does that is that what that means so those those are my questions please >> in reference to the supplements right schools give out supplements uh to teachers um and these are those supplements that are tied to arts and athletics. So would it be like >> visual arts >> like stipens that

095they get for coaching, stipens that they get for clubs? Correct. >> Like if they're a course a coral director, they get a stipen for that. So those stipens that are tied directly above their base teacher pay. >> Okay. And then um staff comp, we know that's reoccurring cost. That's our raises, correct? The staff compensation is our raises that we offered that 9% raise and the raises we've offered since then. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. So I am concerned about like we've got to get out of we got to get away of using reoccurring funds on our millillage and then the 170 million for our and I'm just going to focus for today's purposes on the 1,187 instructional positions. How do we identify those? and what does it mean to be highly qual, you know,

096how do we quantify highly qualified teachers and what does that look like? >> So, I I'm going to attempt to respond um to that and then I'll um see if staff has it. So, um the the term highly qualified, I believe, is being used to identify certified teachers um in our school. And I think that terminology was used as a way to ensure the public understands these are certified professionals that are teaching our our children as opposed to non-certified. Um >> you did it based on >> so that that's my understanding. That may not be accurate. We did have um several I mean several years ago there was um a a designation that teachers received if they went through a series of courses and um portfolio work a national >> correct nationally certified. So, it's

097not that it it it's it's not that. It's my understanding is that it was used to ensure the public knew they were certified teachers that were instructing our children. >> Thank you, Dr. Bazquest. So, that is all does that mean that all 1,187 of these teachers would be considered highly effective teachers on their evaluations? And are all of these teachers classroom teachers? So I don't know that we tied evaluations to that, but given the fact that we have very large percentage of our teachers, I would I would venture to say that the vast majority of them are um highly qualified. Um but I I I can't we didn't tie evaluations to that. Again, I think the term was um back in 2010 was identified as something that the public would understand. These are certified um

098teachers um in our in our classrooms. >> And they are the classroom all classroom teachers. The 187 1,187 are all all considered classroom teachers. >> Not resource teachers like classroom teach. No one none of these positions are at the district. They're all school-based. >> Yeah. No, they're not they're not district level. No, no, no. They're school-based um personnel. Um I I want I I would want to see what the individuals are. From my recollection, they are classroom teachers that we've identified. Um but we'll come back with confirmation of that to the board. Um, may I I just want to add uh I'm glad to hear that there is a clear understanding amongst all the board members that there are going to have to be, as you put it, hard decisions made and that means cuts.

099And I I can't disagree that with only one pot of money, the the sad fact that we're 50th in the state for funding at a time where the state budget can't afford to pay our teachers much more than what they are getting now requires us to re-evaluate where we're putting our money. And if our only option is to revisit staffing so that we can free up more dollars, as you said, Miami date is a highly effective um district with more students, but as you said, fewer personnel. They think you say they have the same things we do. They don't have the same thing. Like they don't have deans, right? Miami >> I meant like I was talking about arts and and athletics. I wasn't I I know that they don't have deans and resource teachers.

100I was referring to the art, >> right? Um and so I I do think that that's going to be an exercise that um our team will be able uh they've already started um to get their site models so that we can then plug in what we have and then we can see the number of physicians. The other thing that um is important to understand is that it is a huge shift in the mindset at the school level. Um because they don't have dollars like right now they get a budget funded on that average class size which is what Miami and Broward also do. They allocate um positions or units based on that. um our principles are able um to evaluate how those positions best serve their community and they may say I've gotten 37 teachers.

101Well, I'll use 100. It's probably for middle or high school. um and um I'm going to pay X number of teachers a seventh period supplement and I'm going to use um the rest of that dollar for XYZ or to fund other positions that will no longer that's that's not part of the Miami date or the Broward model. Um, and I I I cannot disagree that taking a look at what those positions are outside of the classroom and having honest conversations about the the benefits and the drawbacks of using those dollars for those salaries to pay our teachers and our support staff is maybe a trade-off that that's this is where we are. We have nothing else. we've looked under every rock. Um, and I don't see that changing the money we're getting from the state

102anytime soon. And so it's left to us to then be able to, as you said, do the best that we can with the dollars that we have. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, Dr. Vasquez, I really do. And I and I do think, as I mentioned, we're going to have to make some hard decisions and and we're going to have to make those hard decisions with the union. I mean, this is going to have to be discussed with the union on what it looks like, how can we do it, um, how do we make it happen? And, um, and even O ESPA, but I believe that OSPA um, those positions that we're talking about aren't OSPA positions, so they're not going to be as affected like the the the CTA bargaining unit will be.

103So, that's who we need to talk to. But we we need to sit down and we need to talk about class size amendment and we need to talk about these positions because we're going to I mean and keep in mind when we talk about athletics and coaches and we talk about art teachers and music teachers and drama teachers, these are still teachers. These are also teachers that can't afford their healthcare. These are still teachers that are struggling to meet that have families that's, you know, has to figure out a way to make it all make sense with their internal budget. So it's they're teachers, too. And so, you know, we're I'm I'm fighting for them as much as I am any other teacher. So, I would approve or support an in um changing the referendum

104to say increase and improve understanding that yeah, if it happens um we're going to have to make some hard decisions, but I believe based on what this board has already said, we're going to have to make those hard decisions anyways because teachers can't afford to live right now. So, I don't look at it as us making decisions for other boards. I also don't believe that it's entirely the board's fault that we are where we are. I would say it's more of Tallahassee's fault than it is this board. Um, we're a product of increasing health care costs that were trending at 10% and went up to 23%. Nobody could have projected that. especially not a board that is not not a healthc care auditor or understands actuary and those type of processes. That's just not our

105our wheelhouse is education. That's why we're here. >> Thank you. >> Member uh I I need to make sure the board is aware that in it was important to the board last week that we all be present. We're all present. Member Salamanca has to leave in about two minutes. Everybody has spoken except member Douglas. >> Okay. So >> if we want to have a vote with everybody here. >> Yes. My vote counts as well. Thank you. Um just want um I agree with member Gallo about having all the datas before we take very you know sound decisions. It's very important that we get all the documentation in order for us to be prepared to make really hard decision for our teachers and uh I thank you for bringing this document is very valuable to us

106at the moment. Uh of course I just I really want teachers salary to be increased. I really want to to get but I just don't want to cut any other teachers as well to to to make this happen you know so uh I I think that we are all all teachers it doesn't matter if it's a music teacher is a art teacher we are all teachers and we need to be you know I mean treated this at the same level okay all teachers and I'm I'm listening to what um member was saying about making the hard decision and everything. So my question will be is it possible to amend and add increase contingent on the one meal? Increase contingent on the one meal. So that way that solve our problems. Okay. It's not going to

107be only increase but in contingent on the one meal we receive it or not. me member member Douglas, let me clarify, >> okay, >> if this if this fails, then that language increase isn't there anyway. If it passes, the language is either there or it's not there. If the language is there, what that means is we commit that every year, regardless of our financial condition, regardless of the state, regardless of whether or not we continue to collect the same amount in the millillage, we have to give everybody a raise, which means we may have to cut people in order to give them a raise. That's the issue. >> That's what I'm saying. Contingent on the one meal. >> No, I No, I think we cannot add that. >> Are you thinking that we're going for

108the 1.25? 25. >> No, >> because that that's what I this >> this is just the one mil. So what put if the language is is not needed because if it passes that's what we're asking. We're asking if it passes then we want to be able to um use these dollars if we were to go out which is not the discussion for the 1.25 25 then I could see where you were saying if we get the one the the one mil but this is just for the one mil. Okay. And general counsel may be able to speak to how many words we have >> 75. >> Oh okay. All right. So you already know. Yes I already know. I already asked that question. Um so um so we are between the the rock and the

109hard place. Okay. Um and we wouldn't be in this predicament if we receive more money from Tallahassee. Okay. And I believe that is also on purpose to put the blame on school boards and what we're doing and and all these things. So that's purposely done. Um my I am still I I just want to listen a little bit more before I make my decision, my final decision. you still have two people and and then I will make my decision. >> Um, thank you. Um, what I was saying is that we have about about one minute before we lose. >> Yes. And so somebody could call for the question or I wave my time. And now that Okay, everybody wants to talk. Okay. We'll see you later. >> Okay. >> Excuse me. Go ahead. I'm sorry.

110>> Can I make a motion? >> Do we have a motion to call for the question? You don't have to wait. >> I'd like to make a motion to to vote on this now. >> Okay. Is there a second to call the question? >> Second. >> We have a second. All in favor of maintaining the language that has been presented to us by the superintendent. Keep it as it is. Call for the question means we've cut off dialogue. The board believes we have had enough dialogue. Is there support for calling for the question? I that's an I. If you support calling for a question, all in favor of calling the question now, please say I. >> I. >> Okay. Majority of the board is in support of calling the question. The question is, do we

111maintain the language as it is? >> Do we support it? >> Do we support that? Mr. Pomearini, are we in the right position or do I need to wait for somebody to make that motion? Just to be clean, I would like for somebody to make the motion to >> I move that we maintain the language that we have on the ballot and that we move forward with placing this on the ballot as soon as possible. We have a second. >> Yes, we we have a motion. We have a second by member Ferrant. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Opposed? >> Nay. We have two nays. Um >> I I would say three nays. >> Three nays. Okay. Motion passes >> with If we have three five in support, three in opposition. Okay.

112Is there anything further to bring to the board, Mr. Pomearini? >> So, just wanted to alert you all to an issue. I think we're going to be okay, but I wanted to just make sure you have it. So, in looking at the statute for the district millage election, it says the district school board pursuant to a resolution adopted at a regular meeting uh can pass uh for a millillage. Um we started this obviously on Tuesday night which was in fact a regular meeting um and we've continued it today um to uh decide the question but it was a continuation of what we started at a regular meeting. Um I've looked at the relevant case law such as it is um I believe that we are okay even though we didn't finalize the vote during the

113regular meeting because this was a continuation of I want to look at a couple more things. I think we're good. Worst comes to worst. Um, you know, the worst thing that can happen is I tell us that we have to just ratify this again at our June 16th meeting, but I don't think that's going to be necessary. I don't want to do anything to jeopardize the legality of this. So, I will look at it and I will inform the board either. I think we're good to go and I am 98 9% of the way there, but I just want to make sure. So I will inform you if I feel the need that we need to do this again to ratify it in June. I will let you know. >> Thank you Mr. Porini. >>

114All right. The meeting is now adjourned. Heat. Heat.