001Y'all are gonna have to I'm have to use my knuckles today as a gavvel. So, um I would like to ask uh board member Fields to say a short invocation for us. So, as we get started, >> right, >> Lord God, we just thank you for this day and we thank you for life and for health and for strength. Father, let the words of our mouths and meditation of our hearts be acceptable in our sight. Oh Lord, our strength, our redeemer. Father, we thank you for the opportunity to serve. We thank you for the opportunity to come together today to share ideas and more than anything, Lord, just to listen, to listen more and talk less, Lord God, so that we can achieve what our goal is, to provide a quality education for all of
002our students. Thank you, God, for your grace. Thank you for your mercy. Thank you for waking us up early this morning, name by name. Father, we pray for those that are sick. We especially lift up Jason Pitts this morning, Lord God. We pray that you will allow him to go home today and that he will continue to heal and recover. For those that I have not included, I include them anyway. Lord God, we ask all these things in Jesus's name we pray. Amen. >> Amen. And now I'd like to ask our uh board member who is a veteran in the armed forces to lead Mr. Keys to lead us in the pledge. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
003under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Awesome. Everyone can be seated. Um, [clears throat] good morning. I wish uh to extend everyone a warm welcome on this fine January 9th. And I call this board meeting to order. Our first item on the agenda tonight or today is to accept our agenda. Superintendent Hyde, are there any revisions to the agenda as printed? >> There are not, sir. >> Thank you, Superintendent Hyde. So at this time, the chair will entertain a motion to accept the agenda for the January 9th, 2025 board meeting. >> So moved. >> Second. >> It's been motion's been made by Vice Chair Keys and seconded by board member Allen. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, I would like to call for a vote. All those in favor of this motion
004signify by saying I. I. I. >> All oppose. Same sign. The motion carries. Next is public comments for items on the agenda to be voted upon as adopted at the start of this meeting. Are there any cards that have been filled out? There are none. Thank you, Miss Winchester. The next item of business is the approval of our action agenda. >> Mr. Chair, >> yes, >> if I may. Um, there are two documents attached here. The first document is really intended to provide board members with additional talking points and reference points when meeting with stakeholders and/or state legislators. The second attachment called the schools of hope platform item for Pulk schools is the one submitted by Miss Dodge based off the board's request at our previous meeting. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, Superintendent
005Hyde. The suggested action is to approve the amendments to the Pulk County Schools legislative agenda. The chair will accept a motion. So move >> for this. It's been moved by board member keys. Is there a second? Second, >> second by board member Wyatt. We have a motion and discussion. Motion and second. Any fellow any discussion? Fellow board members? >> Board member Allen. >> Thank you, chair. Um, did we include the school of vote legislative platform? Is it actually attached to the published document that goes out to the public? >> It cannot be until after this board meeting. >> Okay. So that was the board had requested that we add this at the last meeting. So we moved quickly called the special meeting and so subsequent to this with board approval it will be attached and
006we will reprint >> our materials. >> Um just as a I probably would not vote in favor of adding this to our legislative platform. And I'll give you my rationale. Um, just this morning, I think it was at 5:40, Joe McGee from the Florida School Board Association um, sent that email out. I don't know if anybody got it or read it. Um, and we we can see that the state board of education um, has notice on the rule making process, which is on January 23rd. Um, our legislative um, days would be on January 28th. So my concern would be if um during the rule making the a lot of the items that would be on this legislative platform as it relates to schools of hope are addressed during that rule making and then we go
007up for our legislative days. I don't want it to seem that um you know we're ignorant in some way that this has already been addressed now during the rule making process. So almost by keeping them separate and not a part of our published platform, um that allows us to have the talking points that's attached to the agenda item, but not be in the published document that goes out to the public. And that's just that would be my own my only opinion on it. Um, I would think that we as a district superintendent, you know, I don't know if there's a possibility for us to be present and representative uh to speak at that rule making process on the 23rd. >> So, go ahead. So, I mean that those are just my concerns that I like
008to put out there and I don't know if anybody else would like to speak to that and >> so the only thing I would offer is the state board of education does not have the authority to amend the the statute. They can only operate within the constraints of the existing statute as it's defined. They cannot for example address these problems through rulemaking. um the issues of additional costs that school districts will incur, whether that's transportation, food service, those types of things, uh collocation of schools, for example, high schools with an elementary school. Um those issues must be addressed by the legislature and there is a bill moving through um this year's legislative session that would address those things. Um so I would I I I hear what you're saying. I think my only concern would
009be and we'd be happy to attend the rulemaking session. the issue will be they will only be able to speak to the current statute in its current form and not be able to address anything outside of that until the legislature amends that statute. So I think making your position statement known does continue to benefit us but and I know fads FSBA are all that advocacy is happening. Um, and I think that's why you've seen such quick movement on behalf of the legislature and the state board of education to acknowledge, wow, you know, we we probably left a few things out of this and we're trying to cl they're seeking to clarify that. So, >> um, but >> and in the past, we've had other things that have moved like this and if we want the
010public to help move it, this is why we're doing this today. [clears throat] Um, so I would I would want to educate the public just because of what the superintendent said because we're not an arm of the DOE. So when we put out I mean we work under the DOE obviously but when we put out what's happening in P County and how it affects us it helps the momentum because this isn't the first thing this has happened on it helps the momentum as they're making changes with the legislation. It's just an additional advocacy already to FSBA and FADS and every other group that's going to be speaking. Um we all we change our message throughout the legislative um process. I know that we've gone in before and had quick wins and so we just kept
011going and ch and didn't focus on that, but we didn't the document wasn't um solid. It was almost evolving even though it's been printed. It was just our statement at the beginning of session. This is what this is what our needs are. But that's just that's my opinion. >> Board member Miller, board member Fields. >> Yes. Um I didn't attend the uh conference in Tampa. I didn't attend the advocacy committee meeting. I think Mr. Keys did uh but I know that that was on the legislative agenda for the Florida School Board Association and a lots of times we try to mirror some of those key factors so that we can all uh hopefully get a win. So I think it needs to be uh included as we had discussed earlier. >> Wyatt, >> thank you.
012Um yeah, Dr. Allan, I hear you. But I also would be hesitant not to put it on hoping that they do the right thing and then them not do the right thing and now we don't have it on our agenda either. Um, so I think it's important to include it. I also think it's a great piece for us for our local community to see these are the these are the issues with it. Yes, in theory it sounds great. You have an extra building. There should be something operating in that extra building. But when we actually get into the nuances of it and what does that look like, I think people read these bullet points and think, "Oh my gosh, do we how do we make sure it's safe? How do we make sure that we're
013not taking dollars from the students that are already there?" Because now we're using their FTE to pay for electricity in a building that may not have had lights on all the time. Um, so I think it really gives us an opportunity to lay it out not just for our legislators who I think we all have had many conversations with already um but as we take our legislative platform to you know I know you presented it already with um inside PCPS but as we hand it to other groups to see okay this is what we're doing and this is why we're concerned about it um I just think it allows us to tell our story um which we don't always have the greatest opportunity to until after the media has blown it up and we're terrible
014people for feeling this way. So it gives us a good opportunity to tell our story with a positive this is what we care about spent. So I would I would include it on the agenda. >> Thank you board member Wallace. >> I have a question for the superintendent on item number two for the PCPS legislative platform on page one about eliminating unfunded administrative and operational mandates. Let me know when you're there >> on the first document. Uh yes, whatever document is too big if it is. Yeah, I just had a question about um uh clear I am in support of us not having to accept unfunded administrative or operational mandates. But my question is would require because sometimes statute when if it says somebody shall do something or there's no wiggle room. So, let's just
015say there was a world where there happened to be a school of hope operator that the community wanted and we had a great positive relationship with. Are we asking for language here that would not give our district the ability to negotiate some of these things? Like for I'm just using my imagination. Say there was an operator that was willing to completely transform a building for us. So, we wanted to encine some of these things listed here. Would we have the ability to have that flexibility? So that's a different issue altogether. That's not a school of hope issue. >> Okay. >> The concern here particularly with the unfunded mandates >> is and I can go through actually several food service is good example >> right >> in some of the applications that we received Southwest Middle
016for example even though the number >> was probably erroneous when they submitted it but they wanted to add 1 1600 students to Southwest Middle School. So let's assume that they really just intended to add 600 students to Southwest Middle School. That's two lunch periods. We do not salary or employ all of our food service employees on eight hour days, right? >> So, we would then incur an additional cost by having to add additional lunch duty. >> That's currently in the School of Hope, we are not able to bill for that transportation. If you look at just one applicant um in their submission and the only applicant who qualified as a school of hope, >> they roughly wanted to add 2500 students to our school, our schools. If we were to assume that 60% ridership, which
017is pretty much equal to what our current district ridership is on school buses, we would not be able to charge them for transportation costs or the costs that we would have to incur to add buses to our fleet. >> Sure. and the state only provides us a 62% on average we receive about 62% reimbursement for transportation costs based off what I was able to pull from FDOE's website. So th those are the issues we're really trying to get at here. I think what you're bringing to the table is if like any other traditional charter school provider who was a high who had a a great track record if they wanted to come in if we had a vacant facility if we wanted to do something I think we've already modeled that albeit not with a
018charter school we did it with the YMCA to open the preschool program in a vacant facility so I think we've demonstrated that willingness so I I believe those are two separate items and I think that we could do that the issue becomes it will be it somewhat conflated if it's a school of hope because under the current statute those would not be negotiable unless they offered that to us >> like there's too many shells on the other side. Correct. We couldn't demand those reimbursements. >> We would that would be the problem for us >> cuz Yeah, I absolutely agree with all the issues you raised making sure that we would have the ability to account for all those things. I was just saying in general that we don't want to go from like one to
019the other if there was a situation where there everything was really cooperative and we were trying to >> and I think that the board would then have as well as the attorney can provide some additional guidance. I think that's a separate issue alto together and we would typically address that through our contractual development our contract development and the terms and conditions that you all would embrace and agree to. >> Cool. Thank you >> board member keys. >> Thank you chair. Um Dr. around. I really appreciate you bringing that up. Um I saw that same email this morning from Joe and for the notice of development of rulem. I think um on this particular situation that was stated previously that that is a DOE issue and we statutoily it's a legislative issue that's kind of still
020working its way out. But I think that keeping it on the agenda allows us to keep the conversation moving forward mirrors what we had already decided on that advocacy meeting with FSBA to keep that on the agenda. And like Mrs. Miller stated earlier, as these things are fluid in motion, I think it not just because it's on there and if something were to change even, you know, through the legislative process, it's still it can fall to the bottom and just not be prevalent. But having it on there, especially at the time where it's at now, I think it just it it it shows the stance of Pulk County Public Schools and the school board of our concern for it moving forward. So, I'd be in favor of of keeping our current trajectory on that. um
021and just seeing where it plays out. >> Um I have a a question, superintendent. Um in that same document that board member Wallace referenced, um we're looking at number three, the refined and correct eligibility criteria, the third bullet point, um the verified by a a neutral statewide review panel prior to eligibility designation. Since this would be part of our platform, I'm just curious what what would that panel look like and how would it verify that a school is truly unable to improve through district intervention to where collocation would be a option? I just >> number I'm just confused about that. >> You're talking about the third bullet. >> Yeah. >> So that doesn't require any review that they would be able to improve the school. that bullet specific to ensuring that that school or that
022charter provider >> meets the qualifications to be considered as a school of hope and that they meet um the criteria for prior performance. So, for example, there's a lot of conversation about what took place in Miami Dade with an out ofstate provider. I would question when we say that that's a that's a great provider and they have an excellent track record. they do in New York using New York educational standards and New York assessments. I don't know what crosswalk was ever had that was done to ensure that the outcomes that they attained in New York would be demonstrated similarly in Florida. Okay. >> So, I think that's the kind of thing we want to make sure that an independent council can look at. This could just fall under the the state's charter school commission quite
023frankly um which is pretty wellrounded. We'd like to see more educators on it, but at the end of the day, we just simply want to make sure that there's a committee looking at this and it's not just a checkbox application. I think there are some things like financial stability, um, how do they staff? Um, you know, charter schools have a lot more flexibility than traditional public schools when it comes to how they staff, teacher certifications, things of that nature. So, I think that's what we're looking for there is just having someone go through the vetting process. >> Okay. And um and there are several schools of hope like or let me rephrase that. There were [clears throat] sk several applicants as you're well aware of because you were copied on correspondence that felt that they
024should meet the school of hope criteria. >> Yes. >> But they never did. >> And until the state tells us that they do, we're not going to entertain those applications. >> So at this point being on here, we're just um at we're asking the legisl legis uh legislators to create that into into state statute that there has to be a panel. >> Correct. >> Okay. And But we're not going to state what that panel has to be comprom uh you know compromised of. Okay. No, we're just simply asking for a process to be put in place, >> okay, >> of a panel of experts, education experienced individuals who can develop whether it's a rubric, whether it's an evaluation process just to make sure that whoever gets recommended for a school of hope designation truly meets
025the qualifications because we all all of us only want this is not a district that is that is um adversarial towards charter schools. That's never been our history. That's not been my history. I believe in school choice. I believe we're here to compete. But at the end of the day, we want high value, high opportunity program providers. And unfortunately, there are a lot of charter schools that just simply don't meet that metric. But because they can hide under the school improvement rating versus taking a grade, they're able to persist. And I think that's what's the frustration point is is that we keep talking about accountability. We keep talking about the money following the kids. Well, from our perspective, from my perspective as an educator, and I will tell you this is FAD's position that if
026the money is going to follow the kids, then so too shall the accountability. You don't get to hide under a school improvement rating. We've got high schools. I shared this data with the board. This is a good example. Our district graduation rate, we believe when the state finalizes it, we'll be at 88%. If you take out charter schools, we will be at 93%. which means we are outperforming the m vast majority of our charters. We have charter schools that have graduation rates less of less than 20%. If that were a traditional public school, it would never be allowed to persist in the system. And yet, because that school takes a school improvement rating, >> there's nothing we can do about it. So, it's a very complicated answer and and >> I was just I was
027just wanting to know what this what this review panel if we needed to include it, but it sounds like it's needed. So, >> correct. Thank you. I >> I think it would be I think it makes sense. I think it assists the DOE. But >> so just to for clarity sake, we've got two documents here that we're voting to approve. Which one is our legislative platform? So in, you know, in regards to timeline, I'm thinking, okay, in the second document, there's four items, right? So, if you look at item one and item two, and I agree, item one, I I have issues with the way that our fish document um [snorts] categorizes utilize space already. >> You know, we tend to, you know, accept the idea that we're including used space as it relates to
028affordable. Well, I I I'm not in favor of that. But as you look at number two, we know that the deadline on that date in particular as it relates to the fish report is April. So it's it's clear that this this is going to be redefined and implemented during rulem rather than because unless they change the timeline and the t the timeline [laughter] have to come through rulem not necessarily through state statute is all I'm trying to okay so what is it that we're accepting because you've got one document that's multi-page >> one document that's four points which is our legislative platform. >> So, the the four-point document, I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. Uh the four-point document is what you'd be approving to add to our legislative platform. The longer version gave you a
029little bit more detail so that you had talking points when you were talking with our legislators or you were meeting with other individuals. So, you're only adopting the school of hope 2026 legislative platform for schools. That's the one that came from Miss Dodge. that's also it has contains very similar language to other counties that she coordinated with >> um to make sure that we were consistent in our messaging >> because it also doesn't benefit the legislature nor the FDOE >> to receive >> 67 different legislative platforms that each approached schools of hope completely differently. >> Um it's it's better when we're aligned with our messaging and our request. So that was the intention here. So I apologize if I wasn't clear at the start. And that second document we can refine any way you see
030fit. If there's language in there you're not comfortable with or you'd like some data behind it, please just let me know. That that really is just for your background information. >> Is there any more discussion? Seeing none, we will I would like to call for a vote. Those in favor of adopting the uh the schools of hope 2026 legislative platform item for Pulk schools signify by saying I. >> I. >> All opposed. Same sign. >> I. >> All right. The vote passes six to one. All right. Next up, we have uh C2, approval of board member travel for Poke Day in Tallahassee, January 21 through 23rd, 2026. The suggested action is to approve this item. The chair will entertain a motion. >> Moved by board member Fields, second. Second by board member Miller. We have
031a motion and a second. Any discussion, fellow board members? >> Yes, board member Wallace. >> Um, as someone who's still learning this process, I actually am still not I would like to possibly attend, but because I'm juggling competing um work priorities. I I'm, as you guys know, for people who work in the um legislative world um and government affairs world, there's a lot of moving parts. And so I didn't feel comfortable asking this board to approve travel for me until I knew for sure that it was something I wanted to do. Um so there's a possibility that I may do so. But if I were to say like um you know next week that okay yes I can in fact do that and I do want to officially travel on board business. Is there a
032procedure for us to approve that or would we do that retroactively or? Uh there are several board members who are going to be traveling to this okay >> event and theirs will be approved retroactively. >> Okay. Okay. So I'll just I'll just um let the staff handle that, but I just wanted to mention that I wasn't quite sure yet. So thank you. >> Thank you. Board member Wallace. Is there any more discussion? >> One quick point. So this maybe goes to the bigger discussion about travel and the form that that was created recently. Um the I guess overarching um theme here is that for outofcount travel um the requirement is for prior approval. So um and that's for amounts over $500. So um that's just something we're trying to standardize across the across the uh
033travel process of requesting and getting prior approval. All right. Thank you, Mr. Green. Board to Wyatt. >> Um, I have a question on that because legislative session is very fluid and we oftentimes find out, you know, a week or two in advance, oh, this is going to be on the agenda and we really need to have someone there, whether it's superintendent or board chair or a couple board members. Can we do similar to how we do with our fuel for the year for if there's a hurricane you can purchase fuel in an emergency that um can we approve for any board member to travel during legislative session to Tallahassee? >> Yes. >> Now and then retroactively bring it back if they have to go between board meetings. >> Yeah. Yeah, you know, we know to
034the extent we know there's a session coming up, [clears throat] there's one a year that it's approved for all members and you know, and then the um you know, the receipts are handled after the fact. It's more the we know that this is happening. Um we know that all most of the members if not all plan to attend. So I think that's I think that's fine. So can sorry >> I was say can we make this motion first and then can I make a motion to approve all board member travel through to Tallahassee for session through end of March >> I I don't see why not it's not I mean it wasn't part of our agenda but I I don't see why we can't add it to there I don't think procedure wise >> okay
035[clears throat] >> that were a new motion or >> this was so finishing this and then we can take up >> a second motion related to this item. >> That's fine. [clears throat] >> Okay, we're going to Wallace. Yeah, just one more comment for feedback is if we need to make kind of rule. I would argue that to um it could we could have a rule for this procedure not just for session but for committee weeks, state board meetings, any um specific government actions that could move quickly that um have nexus to uh controlling what we do or how we do it. Right? So that's just something that we could perhaps entertain >> and and I think that's a further discussion for a policy item that we say, hey, let's let's revise or add to
036policy something specifically says out of county but for legislative type items. Yeah. >> To Tallahassee. I think that's a great move >> that would that would free us up from having to procedurally make these corrections later on. Y >> board member. >> I would definitely be in favor of both positions and it would be I think advised and wise of us to move it through a policy process as well from here and then have a procedural guide in a sense to add to our manual. >> Superintendent. >> So you will actually be seeing a coliseum procedure >> that's already been drafted. Mr. Davis, Mr. Green have already been vetting and reviewing it. we've sent it through staff to make sure that travel reimbursements, those other topics are all following district policy and procedure and then
037so we could uh add a portion to that that draft policy to address this topic and bring that to the board. Um I won't have it in time for the 9th or for the next board workshop, but I can have it in time for the 27th. Um, and I think that gives us enough time to vet it and then get that to you for review because then you're still when it's a policy, we still going to have to have a workshop, have a hearing, and then you can adopt it. But I think it serves to address this. The other option that I think really that would satisfy the issue here is we could look at a three-year history of traditional costs or typical costs that we've incurred for travel related to specific events. And then
038the board during its annual budgeting process when it approves your budget, the board could make a specific motion to say and in advance we know that we'll be attending XYZ and we're preapproving travel for these events. And then you could submit your documentation >> and and and you could simply take a position to say cost not to exceed >> X dollars and that would provide you some general coverage as well. It does not ex it does not recuse the board from having to then do approval of travel when it occurs or prior to its occurrence if available. But it does help address your concern about and you've been in a situation before as chair where we literally got a notice that 8 days later we had to be in Key West for a state board
039of education meeting and there's no way to get that on a board agenda. It has to be done retroactively. Um, but there might be a way to draft that in the policy that would cover things like that. So, if you'll give us the time to attempt that, but that's already ready to go and we'll bring that back to you. >> We can go to this. Do you want us to to make a motion just to do a stop gap for this session so we don't run into a situation where we're out of >> So long as Mr. Green has no objection, I have I I don't think that's a bad idea at all. >> All right. Excellent. So the motion on the table currently is to approve uh the board member travel for Poke Day
040in Tallahassee January 21st to 23rd 2026 as on the agenda. Is there any additional discussion? Seeing none, we will now proceed to vote. All those in favor say I. I. >> All those opposed, same sign. >> Passes. Board member Wyatt, I believe you have a motion. I'd like to make a motion to approve travel to Tallahassee for anything related to session um for any board member between now and the end of March 2026. >> All right, there's a motion. Do we hear a second? >> Second. Been moved by board member Wyatt, seconded by board member Keys to approve travel uh for all board members um through the end of session. Is there any discussion? Yes to be technical I would say through siny die whenever that may be based on [laughter] based on how last
041year's observation >> except that friendly amendment. Okay. >> All right. It was a friendly >> good point. [laughter] >> Yes. Official travel. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Is there any other discussion? Seeing none, we'll now proceed to vote. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. I. >> All those opposed, same sign. Motion passes unanimously. We are now uh to the uh superintendent report. Do you have a report, superintendent? >> I do not, sir. I I provided my report at the last board meeting. >> Thank you. We are now uh to board member reports. Um we'll start with Dr. Allen. >> I yield. >> Mr. Keys, >> same. Yield. >> Miss Wallace, >> yield. >> Mrs. Wyatt, >> Mrs. Fields, Mrs. Miller. >> No report at this time. Thank you. >>
042And the chair has no report. We'll now uh we'll now open it up for comments on items not addressed at today's agenda. We have no cards. And with that, I I now declare this meeting adjourned.