001I'm gonna call the uh the second workshop today on our audit findings to order and recognize Miss Whitehurst to begin the meeting. >> Good morning. Um we are here today um we are going to be really focusing on um the corrective actions that we have been that we have put in place um around the operational audit findings um from the fall for the 2425 operational audit. Um and this is going to be um a joint presentation between myself um Mr. Odum and Miss France. We have all been working together on this. Um so you'll see us come back and forth and and do different parts of this. So I just want to really um review the purpose of today. Um we will briefly review what the findings were for each one of the um 12
002um findings. Um but most importantly what we want to showcase today is what we have done to correct those. what systems we have put into place, what policies, what procedures, what processes and um so through each one and we'll talk about what the findings were, what we've implemented and then we have some evidence to show you as to how that has actually um been put into place. We will also show you um if something has been completed, if something is in progress. Um some things are in progress and it's going to be a continual process. Um, some of these things we are just touching on because it is so timeconuming and it may take um, several months to truly put something in place, but we have addressed each one of them. So, I'm going to
003have um, Jonathan come on up and he's going to just talk about this whole process with us. Thank you. Um here we are looking at the audit correction process. Um and what I want to do here is I kind of want to go over the timeline and what we look at when we receive the audit. So after receiving the audit report number 202638 the PM County School District needed to reply to those audit findings and we did as of October 29th 2025. The due date was October 31st. We received the preliminary ten and tentative findings on October 1st, 2025 and we sent the response October 28th, 2025. After that, the final audit report was issued October 29th, 2025, the very next day. The corrective action initiation was received November 4th, 2025. Here you're seeing a
004letter from April 7th. Um, but what this letter entails, this was the second update for the 180day. You can't see it on the screen, but um, it basically details from November 4th, you have 45 days to show evidence of what you're initiating and you have 180 days to provide evidence of what you've completed. That's the focus today, the 180day evidence of what we completed. And that due date is May 3rd, 2026. we will not we don't have to send it till then but if there are no issues after today's meeting we are essentially prepared to send it anytime between now and then um there were a total of 12 findings across multiple operational areas some were new and there were a few repeat IT findings and our approach was to address each and every finding
005and show a clear and clear action of corrective um corrective action we've taken to resolve it. Any questions? >> Well, Jonathan, one other question. Was >> you have a question? >> was this audit considered a fraud audit or is there a >> No, this is this is an operational audit. They they basically call for everything. They'll I mean it can be anything from fraud um I mean we do our yearly financial audit. It can also cover that but this is looking mainly like operational. You're looking mainly at policies. >> I've heard so much stuff around town. I kind of know what goes on >> here but I mean just kind of crazy sometimes. >> Every three years, right? It's every three years for the operational audit and they're looking to make sure we're following our
006own policies and procedures that we set in place. Which is why on all of these 12 findings, some of the evidence is going to be a procedure or policy that is being implemented to ensure we follow it moving forward. >> Right. Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir. >> Okay. So, audit finding one was around district vehicle controls. And before I get into that, um, one of the, um, findings of that has to do with the mileage reimbursement, um, with Mr. Bowling. And I am going to ask that we wait until the very end to talk about that one. Um, because I know there um, has been some other things that have come up with that. So, I'm going to tell you some the processes that we've put in place around travel reimbursements. But as far as
007getting into the details of that one specific finding, I'm just asking that we wait until the end. >> Okay. I agree with that. Mr. White, can can you also did you does it include um the the prior policies and and of the previous administrations on mileage and and >> um I'm I'm going to show you what we have done to correct that. Yes. Okay. >> Yes. So um so basically what the audit found was that there were inconsistent monitoring of vehicle use and documentation um and there were lack of formal approval and tracking processes um around um approved drivers around travel reimbursement. So a lot of that was all around the documentation and the monitoring. um that issue was really about inconsistent tracking and lack of formalized processes which led to the finding that we're
008going to be talking about later in detail. I mean it it really is around that. And so what we have done is we have built structures around every part of um vehicle usage. So we now have quarterly fuel mileage and usage reviews. Um, I actually just sent an email out yesterday um to all directors and um principles reminding them that first quarter is over. They need to be doing their reviews. Um, there's a form they fill out so that I'm tracking that they have acknowledged and and so forth. Um, daily mileage logs are required for district assigned vehicles. Um, annual vehicle assignment review. Um, that has to do with the inventory. Um, there are semianual inspections. We have a um standard operating procedure now. Um uh we have a disposal process where we are um
009starting to auction off unused and in inoperable vehicles and we have already done so with some of them. We also have updated board policy and procedures. So I want to start with >> Miss Mhers. Yes. Mard had a question. >> Yes. Yes. So uh in reading the policy it says that the superintendent can do it himself or designate. So you're the design. >> Yes. >> So here here here >> well it depending on So which one are you referring to? >> Oh I'm talking about the vehicle and you're checking them and they turn you in court. >> So it or the designate. So the designate is the supervisor that oversees that vehicle. >> I when they're reviewing it, they're going to complete a form and I can show you that form. I've already got a
010couple people who have done it. Um what they're doing is they're putting in the vehicle number. They're putting in who it's assigned to. Um they're putting like were the mileage logs accurate. Were there any concerns? Was it done appropriately? Um so they're doing that for each vehicle that is assigned to their department or to their school. And then I have the spreadsheets where they have acknowledged that they've done that review. >> Yes, ma'am. So I I show up with the car that's assigned to me and I have 200 miles on it in less than a week. So you uh the one that you've designated, they then will call me in early and we'll get this result explain this. >> Yep. And I'm going to show you in just a second what those logs look like.
011>> Great. >> So this is the um district vehicle use and travel reimbursement handbook. Um we had one but it was very old and outdated and there were things in there that were not or there were several things that were overlooked. And so this just really goes through the whole process. Anyone who is um an approved driver, whether they are an approved driver that could drive any of our vehicles or they're an approved driver that has an assigned vehicle, they all have to go through this. They read through it and then there is a an assignment and use form where they're acknowledging that they have received that. We get their driver's license. We go through the whole process. >> Do you still do the the uh drug thing, screening thing? Once I was driving one.
012>> Yes. If if they are Yes. If they are on an approved driver of any kind, they're on the random drug testing that and we do that quarterly. So you never know who's going to get >> so that we can hear you hear it being said that we are >> doing now what we need. Then so we updated board policy and we really updated this specifically around the um vehicles that are assigned if there is a vehicle assigned to a specific driver, it is to get superintendent and board approval. And so that was the part that was approved there or that was updated in that one. And then in the procedures, basically what we did was we took the handbook, we took what was in the handbook and we put that into the procedures, which
013is really showing us how we're going to make sure we're following that policy. So these are the logs and we have two different types of logs. Um so each vehicle has a log in it. Um, and if it is one vehicle that has multiple drivers, so at the high schools, I know that we try to keep a van there um for coaches to use when they need to transport students or or whatever the purpose is. There's multiple drivers at that school who's using that one vehicle. So, if it is one vehicle with multiple drivers, you have this form that's shown up here. And you can see like each time that vehicle is used, they have to write like their name, the school, the date, the purpose, the starting odometer, and the ending odometer. And then
014if it is one vehicle with one driver, so that vehicle only has one driver that has been board approved for that vehicle. A lot of our I mean, if you think about a maintenance person, like they're going every day to several different places and it honestly is just not feasible for them to fill out every time they get in that vehicle starting and ending and what the purpose of that is and so forth. So, what we did on that one was we um agreed to do a weekly log for them. So, at the beginning of they're supposed to track at the beginning of the day or the first day of the week what's the odometer, what's the ending odometer. um the summary of the week's trip. If it's just m if it's just routine maintenance,
015they could just put routine maintenance trips. Um but if there is something that's different, then they would need to put that as well so that it would justify the mileage. And these are the logs that the that's doing the quarterly review that our administrators and supervisors are doing right now. So they're pulling those logs, they're looking through it, they're making sure that it all seems to be appropriate, and if it's not appropriate, then it's going to be addressed. We also um are now have a an approved driver's list. This is shared with HR and transportation. The reason it's shared with HR is because we are the one that's making the determination. Does that person's job responsibilities truly does that person really need to be an approved driver? And so we're keeping this on this spreadsheet.
016This is just a screenshot of it. Um, so you can see there's a place for the name, their department, their job title. Are they an authorized driver or have they been assigned a vehicle? So you can see if it you can probably see from there if it's green that means that they're an authorized driver. They could drive any of our vehicles. If it's blue, it's an assigned vehicle. And so then you see what is the vehicle that's been assigned? What's the vehicle number? Do they have a fuel pin? Some of them may not have a fuel pin, but do they have a fuel pin? Have they submitted their driver's license? Are they driving at home? And then when was that approved by the superintendent? And when was it approved by the board? And so all
017of this is being tracked. And just as an example, um yesterday we had someone who has separated. And so Jackie knows now whenever she when we have our board matters and we have someone who is separated, she's checking the driver list and if they have separated, then she's removing that, contacting transportation for them to deactivate PIN numbers if they have a fuel pin number assigned. This one is one that is an ongoing process and it takes several people. Um, this is the district vehicle inventory spreadsheet. Um, so every vehicle that we have is listed in here with the vehicle identification number, license plate, the make and model, the year, what department is assigned. Um, if it is assigned just to the to the department or is it assigned to an actual person that is listed
018here. Um, we are still working on getting mileage updated on these. And then there's a place for condition and the recommendation. That is where um our mechanics come into play. So, not only do we have someone keeping up with the inventory, but the mechanics are going to be going in semianually and doing a a check-in of the vehicles and making sure that we know what the what the state of that vehicle is. And if it's a keep in service, we know it's a keep in service, but maybe they say that it needs to be disposed. Then Mr. Helms will know, okay, that's one that we need to dispose of properly and and go through those channels. >> How many mechanics do we have? >> Three or four. >> I know there's one in the south.
019I know there's one in the west. And I think there's two in central. >> Probably two. >> So, I think that's what it is. >> One retired yesterday. So, yeah. And at any point y'all have a question, just please stop me. So, one of the other um part of the inventory piece of the vehicles was that we had we didn't have like proper disposal of vehicles. So, this is just showing just a couple of screenshots here of where um Mr. Helms has already started going through the process of putting those um up for auction. These have already sold um and it's been sent to the board for board approval for disposal. So that is also in the process of of happening. >> Okay. Anything on finding one? Yes. >> I have a question about the
020fuel pin. >> Yes. >> So is there a way to identify what car like say I can drive a district car but then sometimes I choose to drive my own car. it the fuel pin. I couldn't use the fuel pin. >> The fuel, right? The fuel pin is assigned to an assigned driver. >> Okay. But it >> for that vehicle, >> it's only for the county vehicle. >> Correct. >> So, so if I wanted to drive my personal car, >> you could not use your fuel pin to go. >> We have a camera on there, too. >> Camera. Thank you. >> And you have to put in Right. Okay. >> So, it and it'll tell you like if you've gone out of town and let's say you've gone to Tallahassee and back, you had to
021stop to fuel up on the way home. You put your pen in the next time it's going to tell you the odometer's out because >> it's not what you would assume because you had to do fill up in between somewhere else. >> Okay. Is that a change or is that how it's always been? >> That's how it's always been. >> Okay. And so when it's inserted in the fuel master, it identifies the vehicle and when you enter the current mileage, it has to match or you have to have it overridden. Is that correct? >> Right. And you have to have like a there should be an explanation of that. >> Okay. Tanya, I have a question. It may be something you were going to cover at a different point, but I think it kind of
022relates to audit finding one. Um, apparently there was a travel voucher form that was in use during the time frame at issue. um when that someone would complete for reimbursement. And according to the FDLE findings, the travel voucher form had three options when it was completed. And the three options three options that were to be completed in seeking reimbursement or in seeking re u travel uh fees. The three options were drove on vehicle, car rental or carpulled. there was no option for a signed vehicle and that was one of the explanations given for the reason that the forms were incorrectly completed. Has that form been corrected? >> Yes, and that's actually written right here in my notes and I forgot to read that. Yes, the um travel reimbursement form has been updated with a fourth
023option of drove district vehicle and also those are now before they're approved to be paid. So, not only is the employee signing it, their supervisor is signing it, but Kim May, our director of fa of finance, is going through those and verifying that everything is accurate on there as well. And then it's being submitted for payment. >> Thank you. >> So, we've put like a couple of different controls in place for that. Thank you for bringing that up. Totally forgot. That's okay. Audit finding two was around tangible personal property inventory. Um the inventory records were incomplete and we had not had a full inventory completed since 2018-19. Um and that is it was really around not having the completed inventory. Um we are now correcting that. Um it is a very tedious process. It is
024in progress and there will be ongoing compliance moving forward. So some of the things that we are doing is we are doing a full district inventory. Mr. Helms and his team is working on that. Um there is a new tracking system with real time updates. Um we have annual inventory procedures that we are establishing. We're actually in the process right now of going through um some of our purchasing policies and procedures and those will be once we get that all worked out like we understand there's some things that needs to be updated in that as well. Um and then we do have some protocols um if there are missing items as to how we're going to go about that. So this is just a screenshot of the inventory and I know that's really small um
025but this is the fixed asset management program and every item that is Brian are y'all putting in is there a threshold that y'all are looking at? What is that? Do you >> $1,000? So, anything over a thousand is going to be in this inventory. Um, and it is I mean they're having to go and scan and input the information. So, you can just imagine um this is not going to be anything that's going to be completed overnight. It's going to take several months. Um, but our goal is for it to be completed by June 30th. >> Are there tags on each of the like desk and >> anything that's over $1,000 has a uh barcode on it for it to be scanned? Also, part of that is this kind of goes back to how we've
026been disposing of some vehicles. Um, but we're also disposing of tangible property. Um, Mr. Helms has been working on getting that on um the auction site that we have, which is Gov deals. Is that what it's called? Okay. Um, and you can see like the items that are here, all of those are items that have already been sold. So, and there's a lot more. I just wanted to show you a screenshot. So, that's all part of that inventory process of making sure that things are also disposed of properly and items that we can sell, we will put up for auction. And it had been several years since we had put anything up for auction. I know >> because I've gotten some things in the past. >> Okay. Anything else on the audit finding >> them?
027>> All right. I'm going to have um Mr. ODM come back up. He's going to talk about the next um I think three findings. So, audit three was in regard to promptly paying vendors. And I want to clarify that this is not improper payments. This is the timing of the payments. Um these pay these invoices were being paid late due to invoice gaps. So in some way we weren't receiving them in a timely manner and then processing them in a timely manner. Um we have addressed this through monitoring and training which we will see some examples here in a second. But in the audit, there were 12 tested construction invoices and 11 of them were over the 25 days to pay and they range between 32 and 158 days. The average of that was around
02890 days uh to pay. Of non- construction invoices, there were 18 tested and 14 of them were over the 45 days to pay and between 49 and 222 days. And I think the average of that was 138 days. Um, so what we implemented, um, we're doing monthly budget reviews and one-on-one meetings with secretaries and bookkeepers at schools, uh, helping them to understand their budgets, uh, reporting for their budgets, and reviewing any open POS they have. Um, and these meetings started in December of 2025. We plan to send a May a memo in May uh, to the construction companies highlighting the end ofear invoices because this is something that we had an issue with last year. Um, one of the construction companies turned an invoice in really late and we had to do an accounts receivable
029for it. Um, excuse me. No, we did an accounts receivable for to pay it afterwards uh to pay in the new year. So, here is an example of the process we started to uh initiate these one-on-one meetings. Uh in the upper leftand corner you see a email sent to staff with a scheduling link to um sign up for and in the bottom right corner you see a comment from a department secretary uh and it states I appreciate members of the finance department being accessible when I have questions. When I did the bookkeeping years back we never had monthly check-ins. I think this is a great idea. It not only provides oversight and accountability, but allows an opportunity to build a rapport between the finest department and schoolbased bookkeepers. Did we include the signup? >> No,
030I didn't. Okay. Okay. So, I think I was provided a few screenshots of the signups and it's like an Excel document that showed different dates and actual secretaries and bookkeepers who have signed up for different times. Um, that's just one of the examples of what we have done to schedule these meetings, whether it's a phone check-in, whether it's actually sitting down person in person and going over what we need to in order to um get the training they need. Are there any questions on that? Jonathan, the only thing I'd like to add, not I may have already told you this, but if you've got any employees in finance that handle any of these concerns, like payments or, you know, for travel vouchers, anything like that, if they've got questions that that they don't feel like
031something is right or correct, they need to be outspoken and not be scared and go to you and and let you know. Just just just throwing that in there. I think we've already had this conversation though. >> Yes. And I I'll tell you on that on that statement um all reimbursements for example are now going Kim man is laying her eyes on them >> and I can also tell you that I've had a couple come back to me and just saying hey you either need this documentation or you need to change this >> good. >> So um it it's even hitting me. So which is good. So >> Jonathan, in your opinion, how much more work have we put on the people in your department just with all the or has it made it run
032more efficiently? >> Um, I think when you put more things in place where you're checking, you have it's it's going to be more work, especially if it's a manual process. Um, but from my end and from what I've heard, I have not heard that anyone's feeling like they've they're stressed like to the limit. And that I mean, I can keep an eye out for that. And of course, if it ever gets to that point, I I'll have a conversation with Tanya, with Rick, uh, with Laura and see what we need to do to make sure they wouldn't be stretched too thin in that regards. But I think they would rather catch it >> at they catch it as opposed to an auditor catching 100%. I think they're going to be pleased. >> And and you
033guys don't see it, but just for an example. And on to the workload aspect you brought up when the construction started. That was an increased workload. But we've we've had two instances of fraud actually hit us since this entire construction project started. Both instances we got the money back. Um, one we came to you as a board because it was 60 grand. The other one was a very small amount. Um, I can't tell you how many times we've actually caught it on our own. Like the emails I've received myself or the emails they forded around our office because it's another attempt. Um, we've had that regularly and we've only been caught well not even been caught twice. I I won't even say that because both instances were checks sent out to the right location, intercepted
034and whitewashed. So even our normal processes of trying to catch that um we've been doing a really good job on. So >> awesome. >> Any other as far as vendor payments? >> And still it really your best you you've got it. It sounds really good to me what you got, but you're still gonna >> from time to time you're going to have anomalies and problems that are just gonna continue to come forward, you know. >> Yeah, it's going to continue to happen. They're always going to try. Um, one of the things we do is we ever receive an email, phone call, anything requesting a change to something. One of our first steps is when we get off the phone or we finish reading the email, we call the company directly. We call them. That's the
035That's one of the best things you can do as far as that because then we know we're talking to the right people, >> right? Moving on to audit finding number four. It is regarding purchasing card processes. And want to also clarify on this. This is not anything to do with purchasing card purchases. That was a finding. This is the process of cancelling a purchasing card after employee has terminated. So they tested 16 purchasing card holders and seven of them were not canceled in a timely manner with an average of 89 days canled after um they separated from the district. There were no fraudulent or inappropriate charges after the separation. We've now built a direct connection between HR and finance uh to notify myself of any separations whether it's um change in time uh leaving uh
036separating from the district a new work assignment anything like that. So if if someone has a purchasing card here at the district and they go work at a school and they should no longer have it I will even see that. >> Um let's see what we've implemented. So, that's exactly what I was just saying is the notification of all all separation emails, but it goes past those separation emails. Um, and then when that notification is received, I review the employee in Skyward and I see if they're with the school district or with NEC. If it's with us, I check their PC card personally. I handle all the purchasing cards myself. Um, I set the limits. I following board policy that we set uh a couple years back. and then I would deactivate it immediately um
037if necessary. If it's a NECA employee, I contact one of their administrative assistants uh to handle the cancellation of that and then we want to verify verify it after the fact. What you're seeing here is a procedural document that I actually followed it format in one of theirs and did it for purchasing cards. So in this we see basically what I just went over as far as what we do now, what we implemented down at current procedures, we go the automated notification and then we uh number two says employee verification. Under number two says if it's a PACSD employee, what do we do? If if it is, we go ahead and see if they have a purchasing card and we cancel. If it's not uh we move to nephew. In NEC the number one step
038in the upper right hand corner is we reach out to the administrative assistant over there to provide them with the employees information and have them check for a purchasing card. Put a little note at the very bottom middle of the screen. This has not been an occurrence yet since the audit finding. So we haven't actually done it. There is no evidence of us um having to do the knee cancellation. Um, and one of the reasons I say that is because all but two of the tests were NEC. So, we only had two employees that this directly affected um when the audit finding came down. >> Jonathan, I have a quick question. So, um I don't know, it's been a year and a half, two years since um Superintendent and Miss France and I met with
039um the NEAC administration and they increase their allocation to us for the financial services we provide for them pretty significantly. Did we hire somebody to kind of oversee that um process or tell me how that >> did that? >> No. And so historically the the 125,000 it's it's increased over time. Um >> it's now 150,000. >> Correct. >> So historically that amount has gone to finance and HR employees um as a supplemental type of pay. it it's not set up as a supplement and it's not set up necessarily as a differentiated pay, but it has gone to those two departments for the increased workload because we're one of three districts in the state that do work with a consortium to do their accounting um and um employee services. So um there was not a hire
040specific for it. It was and one of the reasons it was increased along with um us having those meetings back then um was last year, the year before last, it did not cover all of the uh payments out. So Mr. WCK told me in one of the meetings that if that ever happens again, let them know and even if it's over the 150, they would cover the difference um because they understand what it's for, the the purpose of it and everything. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Anything else on this one? All right, we'll go to audit finding number five. This one um was the easiest audit finding we've ever had to fix. Uh they told us about it immediately reached out to NEC and it was fixed within probably an hour. Um so this one
041is fiscal data and trends. The fiscal transparency was missing for the 2324 school year on on NEX website for Putham County School District. The fiscal transparency data always lags a year behind. Um it simply wasn't it wasn't wrong. It was just missing. Um, so the real fix here is going to be prevention and not really anything else. And the way we're doing that is we're setting up automated reminders, notifications that I will receive each year and I will reach out to NEP to uh handle this. This is the data that was missing and I wanted to include this on here just to show each green arrow points to a 2324 school year. Uh because that is a data that I mean the same day the auditors reached out to me. I I got him got
042it uploaded uh through NEC. I contacted Adam and he had it up within within an hour. So this is something that NEC usually does for us. Um, it was an oversight on their end. It was an oversight on our end for not verifying that it was up. So, that is the point of the automated notification reminder. I'm going to reach out to them, ensure it's up, and then I'm going to turn around and verify that it is up. Are there any questions on this? Just just a um quick um so in the new uh schoolboard bill of rights legislation there there is a provision that is going to require school districts to um do a line item budget on their website. Will they do that for us or so? You can get a little bit
043granular on here but I don't think that's going to probably qualify for that. I will say several months back um I showed the executive team um a product from another county and actually our local government uses it um it is called budget book I'm trying to think it it's through it's through clear gov clear gov budget book um and if you go on the county's website you can see it I showed an example from another Florida school district to our executive team that got very granular. You can get you don't have to get down to there is a granularity where you can see pictures of a check or pictures of the attachments on on there. Um so there's that option we're going to do and I'm actually working going to be working with a local
044uh Lauren Shank who works for clear gov to get ours built out. We had a meeting on it within the last month um because she's also helping on our capital tracker for the schools that we're going to try to get out there for construction transparency as well. Um so both of those projects are kind of already in play or already moving a little bit. I will say the digital budget book hasn't had any work done on it yet. Her and I spoke in email probably within the last two weeks to set up an appointment. So that is that is in the works not not because of the bill but because of something we were already looking at. >> Gotcha. >> Anything else for me? >> All right. >> Thank you sir. >> So audit finding
045six was around employee services and specifically around um some telework procedures. Um what the audit found was that we did not have formal telework procedures or a formal process for approval um if we did allow anyone um to do any telework. So what we did was we um put in place a formal hybrid work. Um so kind of back up just a little bit we did like a trial. There's several districts um that I actually reached out to and I kind of piggybacked off of what some of the other districts were doing and we did it as a trial just to see and get some feedback on it. And what we ended up coming up with is we are only doing this on a temporary basis and there has to be like some extenduating circumstances
046to allow it. Um, so and it goes to the supervisor to me to the superintendent and then there's board approval. You actually had one yesterday on personnel matters. Um, so we have this formal um standard operating procedures. It goes over the purpose. It talks about that it has to be extenduating circumstances and it is only um for a temporary period of time and that has to be documented. Um it shows that there is that job duties could be done through a teleawwork type um assignment. And so you have um the employee also has to be a trusted employee. Like you have to know that that person's going to do their job even if they're having to do it from from home. So you have all of the procedures and and it also states in there
047that it can be ended at any time as well. So like a supervisor can say this isn't working, we need you back like and it can end. Um so the employee has to um agree to what those procedures are and then there is a form that they fill out and I'll show you what that form looks like because we did have one um for uh that was board approved yesterday. So this is what the the form looks like. Um I do have this blacked out for the reason. Um it's a a confidential reason. Um but this was um someone who was not going to be able to come into work. His work is very necessary pretty much every day in the IT world. Um but it is for just a period of time. And so
048that is what this process looks like. Now the um temporary hybrid work approval form has the employee fills it out comes up with like what that schedule is gives the reasoning attaches any documentation if there's documentation there you have the supervisor approval you have my approval you have the superintendent's approval and then it came to the board for um board approval and one of the things that when we talked about this before um one of the the things that we did talk about was you know I know y'all had wanted this to be something that happened beforehand. But in this situation, and this is what I was explaining that day, is there's going to be times due to whatever that reasoning is, that it may not be able to get to you ahead of time
049because it needs to be done in a pretty quick um time frame. And so so that's why that is going to most of the time it's going to end up being after the fact because it's usually due to something that is um that's just come up or extenduating and we don't have the ability to get that approved ahead of time. So that actually completely takes care of audit finding six. Um it has been corrected, it's been implemented and it'll be ongoing. So, audit findings seven through nine all had um to do with construction monitoring. So, we just kind of grouped those together because it had to do with um the con the construction management entity um the payments, it had to do with subcontractor selection and general conditions cost. So, seven was around the the
050payments, eight was around the subcontractor selection and then nine was around the general conditions cost. Um this was all around um some oversight as well as maybe some this is just a best practice. There was not anything in statutory language around having to have someone present with the subcontractor selections because we're hiring a general contractor. We're hiring a construction management. It's their job to go out and seek the subcontractor and do that process. Um, so it was it was really a matter of these are some best practices. It wasn't about not following a policy. It wasn't about not following a procedure. It wasn't about not following state statute. Was just about what was best for the district. Um so we have worked on um first thing we uh one of the things that we have
051done is we've hired an executive director of construction management who is currently right now at an OAC which is owner architect construction manager meeting um on at uh Palaka primary site. Um so he is very involved in all of the things to deal with all three of those findings right there. Um we now have a prepayment review that is set in place um before any payment happens on any um invoice that's coming from um a construction u management company. Um we have attendance at subcontractor bid openings. Um verification of competitive bids. Um we're monitoring GMP contracts and subcontractors. We're we're really looking at all of that. And then there's just this ongoing invoice and cost validation that is happening um continually. >> Con I ask a question. >> Yes, sir. So um one of the
052items you have there is in my opinion very important and that uh well I mean all of them are but one of them I see in my work representing some municipalities and other entities um is is kind of it's kind of integral to having a a good process and getting the best bang for your buck and that is the competitive bidding of the subcontractors. So, I know that we go through you go through the district goes through a real process in selecting a contractor, maybe even a construction management firm or architect or engineer. But a lot of your prices obviously a lot of the numbers that ultimately result from a project are the subcontractor numbers. >> And I see that you've got verification of licenses and competitive bids. That means that you're verifying that u
053the subs themselves whe whether it be for let's just say concrete that there are competitive bids going out uh for the concrete work by the contractor >> and those are those are the bids those are the numbers that are being plugged into the overall equation. >> Right? So you can see right here on um the um right on Ajax this was their bid opening um for their subcontractor. So, they had already been awarded um they were going to be our construction manager. Then they go out for the bid opening and you can see um that Travis was there and Brian Helms was there. So, they're they're present at all of those where the subcontractors the competitive bidding is happening. We do not have a say like we're we're not the ones doing that. We're just
054there observing and if there are questions then they can ask some questions but we're just part like we're not a part of that selection process but we are present. bid is >> correct >> double what another bid is and they take the higher bid then that would certainly give you the >> ask questions correct >> ask questions right >> um so finding seven was around um really the pay app and the payments going towards the construction um company so what um finance did was Kim um Kim man the director she created this checklist that um shows exactly um what is happening and actually I think I have the wrong checklist list right there. We're going to look at the one that's Osley. Um, you have Osley and and Ajax. So, what's happening when she's getting
055something in on the pay app, she is actually the one going through, she's verifying the contractor signature. She's verifying that the architect has signed it. She's verifying that the the pay app has been notorized. She's verifying um that the director of construction, like all of those things have been done, and she's looking through every piece of that. She takes it to JD Thompson, our executive director of construction management. He looks over it. He signs off on it. Then it gets sent to for payment. So there are double controls that have been put in place. Um and one of the things that Kim and I were talking about this morning is the the administrative assistant over at maintenance was trying to do all of this, trying to do all of the ODP, still trying to be
056the administrative assistant for maintenance. And so taking this piece off of her has really freed her up to really focus on the owner direct purchasing parts that we're doing and Kim and JD are very integral in verifying through the pay apps >> and and so Tanya and in the report and this is under actually finding number eight you know where the um the auditors reported that you know uh five contractors received no bid contracts and uh and then the reason was they provided similar services to the district. So bids weren't warranted. Um however the when the auditors requested that information it was never supplied to the auditors is that and so this this process will eliminate that >> right because we have someone that is involved like we said before like there's JD >> Brian
057Travis there the between the three of them there's always going to be people at all of those subcontractor bid openings and then um you can see here this is an email from Oley and they provide a share file um with Mandy who is the administrative assistant over at maintenance that has a link to all of the executed subcontracts. So we actually now have access to what those subcontracts are. It's not just this company with this price. We're actually we have a link to it. Um, so you can see that one's from Osley and then this one is from Parish McCall. It's the same process. So we're very involved in even the subcontractor piece of it now. >> So does Ajax send us the same type of thing? >> Yes, I just had those were just
058ones that I'm just >> because it's parish call and Ajax who we're working with now, right? >> Yeah, correct. >> Yeah, Oley is almost finished. So >> and then the audit finding nine was around the general conditions. So you can see now we are receiving um and I will even say um when for example when we did um Palaca Primary GMP and Melrose GMP we were actually in this room um with every director of every department that possibly could have something going on in the middle of the construction. We had an IT representative. We had um school food service director. We had our purchasing director. We had um maintenance like we had curriculum. We had um anyone that would have a perspective on what needs to happen in the building process. And that was the
059first time that a full team had come together to look through every piece of the GMP >> and the principal of the school. And so like we had that um we had that for PLA primary. We actually had some things and we're like no this has got to be a little bit different. They went back they changed it and then we did it again for Melrose. So those are two things that we have. We're trying really hard to make sure there's not anything that we're not catching ahead of time >> before the GMP comes to the board. >> Yes. So all of those are like preGMP meetings so that when you get it, it's been scrutinized by multiple people in the district. >> So >> in our past schools, we've had to go back >>
060because we didn't do that process. So we learned a lot from those >> earlier. >> So that's documented. Yeah, we have signature sheets where we're signing in that all of those and and there's just there's so much feedback that's going back and forth and they come back with what we've requested or what our suggestions are and and so forth >> because wasn't one of the findings that Mr. Woods was there but he just wasn't aware >> that was in the subcontractor part. Yes. That's why we we have signatures now on everything that we are a part of. even even with all the things that we're doing and learning about, we're still going to have mistakes from time to time. So, I've just >> there it's there are things that we >> it's fall through the
061cracks. >> Yeah, it it is. So, unfortunately, and I will just give you >> not intentional. No, I will I will give you um an example right now and and we're so thankful that they're um that we have a way of of making sure it gets uh taken care of. >> Um on Pala Primary, um the the GMP very specifically says that um school food service equipment is provided by the owner. Um Nikki was not aware that that was going to happen for Palaca Primary. She had said that she could do Crescent City High, Middleton Bernie, and Palaca Intermediate. In the Melrose GMP, it is in there. Like, we have uh we have that in the GMP because we knew um but it just it got overlooked and we don't know how it got overlooked,
062but Mr. Thompson and I met with Nikki Hawthorne the other day and we explained the situation and she's like, "I can do it." She goes, "That's that's why when she gets an audit, usually the only thing that she has that's ever said like a a finding. It's not I don't even know if it's really a finding is she carries a fund balance." And she's like, "This is why I carry a fund balance so that I can help the district when the district needs help when it comes to school food service." So, and it's just those things like that that's we, you know, I don't know if you would ever be able to catch 100% of every single thing that happens. And, and a lot of times you get in the middle of it and you
063realize, oh, wait, >> I mean, so, >> so with um finding nine, it was really around like a lot of the general conditions part of the GMP. And you can see um this is just an example. Parish McCall um has sent like attachment that has everything with the general conditions. Um this was one from Ajax that he had sent um Travis an email very clearly talking about um when they were meeting and the general conditions piece. So that now is part of the conversations and we're looking in detail at everything that is within the general conditions. anything on 7 through nine? Okay, so 10 through 12. Um, Miss France is going to come up and we're going to kind of tag team on this. Um, this is really around user access controls um involving it.
064There were some that involved some student data, some that involved um employee access that should not have been and then timely deactivation. So, I'm going to let her start with this. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, these were um all three of the findings 10, 11, and 12 are the second year that they've found these the second time. So, it's necessary. I mean, absolutely necessary that we fix it at this time. And so, uh some of them h they have been we have implemented processes and uh some of it is going to be um ongoing work. This work never fix never finishes. Um this is really around just uh colloquially it is around skyward business. That's the skyward business piece. Okay. All right. Um so the first one is around student access to um
065social security numbers and employee access well to student social security numbers in Skyward. So employees having access to those numbers and so um this is we have procedures as to who um how we limit that. Um we've created some procedures around that. We have uh the definition of really what is that very limited group of people who should have access to social security numbers. And we um now once a month we actually download the list of who has that access and we review it to make sure that nobody has been added. Part of this problem is that that social security number was found in a couple of different places in Skyward. uh we had to create a way to take that off of um a pathway and now what we've done is is no one
066has access to social security numbers unless you are given like there's a defined group of you have social security numbers so we've removed that pathway from every like a data clerk doesn't have that pathway but we may assign a data clerk at the school social security access and they you can only get it if you're in that assigned group. So, that was um created. That really should limit it. That way, nobody can have access unless they're in that defined group. And this is that defined group. Every month they run the report. We can review and make sure that nobody's been added that should not have it. Okay. So, that's finding 10. >> Good question. Absolutely. So, um, is that a skyward business problem as much as it's our problem? >> That social security number is
067located in the student sector, but what access you have been given in the business side is what then gives you access to the student panel. >> But, so we've limited that. >> We we've limited that. It's a very small group of people and once a month we pull it over, we run the list of who's in that group. We review it and we have it here so we can show who has it. >> Would it also show up that I who did not have access tried to or maybe somehow I got in to see it or is it >> you you wouldn't be able to see it because we've removed it from every pathway now. >> Okay. There's no way. >> No. Okay. Yeah. >> What I was just gonna say it the enormous, you
068know, we probably still the largest employer, Rick, in Putnham County. Yeah. I mean, but these there's so many cracks and crevices. If they came in and did an audit again this week, they would probably find something else in this along. >> Not in this one. Not in this one. I can tell you that. And I will say part of it is is I some of you have been in the school system long enough that our identifier was our social security number. Like that was my student number >> for a very long time. Um now we have FLIDs, fleets, the Florida educational ID number that then is now what is the identifier for using kids. But that doesn't mean that those social security numbers went away because those are our identifiers. As me of a student
06930 years ago, that's my identifying number. So, what we did, what we found is um a couple of places that the social security number because it was the student identification number a long time ago was in places from like No Child Left Behind, like panels that were from a long time ago that people it's still an active panel. People aren't using it. So, we've just now taken all access to those pieces away, like those fields and all of the student panels. So, we we've really scoured that one. This one will not be a problem again. We we have we that one I can promise you we we are complete on this. This this one's done. The finding number 11 um is actually very very timeconuming and this is it controls the user groups in business
070but what those user groups are defined to do is has been developed over >> 20 years. >> Two or three Yes. And so there's a lot of um pathways that might have said, well, we want this. We want PE teachers to have access to these five things. Well, then we keep adding things to it. And then maybe I was a secretary and then I went to federal programs and I needed access to federal programs, but I still needed access to the school because I was helping them before I left. we've created all these very unique pathways for people so that they can do specific jobs and we needed to clean that up. So, so when we started looking into this um it like Laura said it went back two or three IT directors back. So,
071we're talking many years back with some of these security groups. And so, um what we did was we you can see like we had an initial meeting and now we have follow-up meetings. We have one actually on um Friday where we're going to see where we're at with it and and um myself and Jackie Smith um administrative assistant for HR is working very closely with Elise um Crabtree administrative assistant in it. We're looking through like who's in that security group, what are their job duties, should they have those access, but it is going to take us a while to get this where it needs to be. um we had to reach out to um NEP. Um they have a brilliant brilliant person over there that um can create some programs and and run some reports
072and kind of walked us through how we can even begin looking at the security groups because what happened part of the finding was some people had um some access to some finance pieces that shouldn't some people had access to HR pieces that should not have. So there's not an easy way when we were like, "Well, let's let's look at it by employee." How many pages was that one, Elise? Like 1,500 pages. Yeah. Like exact. Yeah. There there's no way you can go through 1500 pages. So then we're like, well, how do we like how do we even begin this process? So we created some procedures. Um a lease had to go in. I think we had 90 empty security groups. security groups that's been created and didn't even have anybody in it. So, we needed
073to get rid of those to kind of hopefully minimize the reports that we rece were were receiving. Um, and now we're and I believe you have completed deleting all of those. >> So, now it's really just a matter of we're going to start with finance or HR. Honestly, I can't remember which side we're going to be looking at first. and we're going through and we're looking at every security group that's attached to HR access. Um, and then you're going to have to look at each employee and find out like why is that employee in that security group? First of all, you have to figure out what all access does this security group have. And some of the things that we found was just as simple of the access level. So they had a five, which
074meant they could really do anything and they didn't need a five. So we were having to change the level of access. But then you're also having to look at each individual person in that security group and determine do their job duties need every one of those pieces of the HR employee section in Skyward. Do they need viewing access or do they need editing access? So it is extremely timeconuming. Here are some screenshots of just the Skyward process to even review those groups. Um, again, we are working closely with Neph on this. Elise is working on this every chance that she gets as well as working and making sure that the social security numbers are taken care of and people don't have access to that. >> Can I interject about this new program? >> Yes. You
075want to come up? You want to come up, please? >> Get you on the record. >> So, Adam Sailor at Nep created this. >> Wait until you get up here. >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. So, Adam Sailor created this um platform. It's a live platform called um PowerBI and it can be dissected by groups. It could be dissected by employees and it carries it down to each pathway that that person can see. Um so, let's just take Miss Whitehurst for example. So if I pull up her name, I can see every pathway that she can see dissected by web financial web uh human resources or product setup which is all of the main characters of what we use in it. Um, if I go in and see that Miss Whitehurst, if she was a teacher,
076let's just say that she's a teacher and she has secured credentials in Web Financial, then she is going, "What are you taking a picture of me for?" >> Send it to your motherhu >> to convince her that her granddaddy >> this meeting is a journal. He was a he was a school board member forever. So if I see that Miss Whitehurst is a teacher and she has credentials in web financial for whatever reason and I can see what paths that she can actually see whether she can just do it as a lookup level whether she can do it as some type of editing procedures and also identified that she's a teacher she doesn't really need that. Um, but how some of these what I've seen how some of these have ended up as errors where
077people have had access that they don't need is um I have a data clerk that went to a uh administrative assistant or a secretary in a school and then I have the principal saying I need you to mimic the old executive secretar's permissions. And so I clone that to that person. And there may be something on there that that person doesn't actually need in their new position, but I've used that security group that Jane Doe had and now I've added it and now they'll say, "Well, now she can see all of the budget for federal programs and I don't want her to see that." Um, you know, and so those are how those things can take care of. But in this new program, which I love, it's they don't allow you to take any um
078reports. It's not downloadable. You can't um export anything from it. You can just use it for um this type of situation. These are the screenshots I made for myself. Um and in this situation, it was one of the data clerks that work in assessment and accountability that had the web financial. Um no, not her. She w that wasn't her. she had the passwords. She had some type of password thing that was but she used to work for it and so that never came off when she went over to um assessment and accountability. So I found that removed it took a screenshot added it to my folder. But it is truly a rabbit hole that you go down. And it can be if it was my only job, I would love to just create executive secretary,
079this is what they need, and I would assign that to every secretary. If it was just teacher, this is what they need. And I would create and then I would delete all the old things because as time has evolved, we've just compounded and added to >> to where we've landed now. And but unfortunately it's not my only job. >> Miss Crafter while you're there and um Miss Wagner had a question. >> Yeah. And I you you somewhat I think resolved that. But it it it's really concerning that we ended up where we are because when I'm hearing these access issues and I'm very very glad y'all are working on this and it sounds like you're on it. Um it just was there was there nothing for example if somebody switched over somebody at the district
080then if they're in a new position and maybe needed a different or or more access was there nothing before now in place where the person giving the the additional access to this person did they ever look at I mean was there any anything at all policywise that we had that said okay well this person's now here let's see what they have. Let's see what they need and let's doublech checkck it right then. It seems like would have avoided all of this. >> You are correct. But it is >> and obviously we can't go back and and fix >> but it is time consuming and you have to understand I am the security one of the security managers there but I'm also the tech person. I'm the payroll person. And so I might dive into Miss
081Wagner's um secured credentials and they say I need this right now and then it may just fall down the wayside. I mean I'm just being perfectly honest, >> right? I'm just asking if if there was there just wasn't any procedural >> but I can promise you it is not it has never been more clean. >> It has never been more clean than it is because I have lost sleep over this stuff. It's it's been consuming and I've had a lot of help and >> but in essence it it will be as clean as a whistle. >> Great. Well, thank you for your work >> and and I'll just give an an example that happened I think last week. Elise sent um an email to Jackie and myself and asking if someone in our department should
082still have access to um purchase orders. And we're like, "No, but that person was an executive secretary 8 years ago, you know, and it just it it's just one of the processes that we had to get fixed. And again, when we started looking at this, there were so many security groups and there really wasn't an easy way of figuring out what security groups each person had until it started becoming an issue. And now with this PowerBI that's been created, it's going to be much easier. Um, Elise receives a notification of any change of employee. So she she receives all of our personnel action forms. So if it's a transfer, if it's a new assignment, if it's a separation, whatever it is, she's seeing that and now she has an easy way or an easier way
083of going in and just doing a search on that person and figuring out what they have and what they need to have taken away or added. So, >> and so when when when an employee it uh retires or terminated or whatever the case might be, >> her office Oh, there I'm going ahead. I back up. It's okay. It's okay. >> Um so, finding 12 had to deal with the timely deactivation of access. Okay. >> And and I know um Okay. >> So, yeah, we're we're probably going to like go back and forth on this. So, one of the things that um that we have to keep in mind is there's a couple of different pieces when an employee has access to Skyward. So, I have access to the um to the human resources part, but
084I also have my own personal employee access. When a person separates from the district, so they need to be deactivated. you cannot deactivate it as far as like the employee access piece until after they receive their final paycheck and they have been paid out and there's not any like we we try to wait a couple of days. Um payroll takes care of that and and so we were really kind of waiting and just really kind of building all of that around that part. But what the audit finding was about when we finally got through that piece was it's really about their access that they have. Not their own employee access, but what other access do they have either in the the finance piece or in the HR piece or in um the student piece. It
085could be a teacher that has still student access that they don't need until they get paid out. So one of the things again we have put some procedures in place for this um and you can see there is a definite procedure step by step step that is happening um so it starts with an automated notification. So when we do um our we call them C13s that's our personnel actions when we when we do one of those sometimes we do it and it's months ahead. So several of the people I'll give an example of Mr. and Miss um Pulam yesterday who's retiring. They're not retiring until the end of the year, but we've already processed all of their paperwork. Um we have it set, but we can't deactivate anything on them until after they are actually
086done. So um another example is Tracy Rollinsson. She's another one. So Elise gets this email. It's an automatic notification. It was dated Wednesday, April 8th for Tracy Rollinsson, it says that she is separating from the district. But when she looks at that, when she goes in and looks at it, she's not separating until May 29th. So, what she has done is she has created a way of going in and creating an email where she does a schedule send on that email. So, she has one here that says, "Remove Tracy Rollinsson credentials May 29th, 2026." And she has it set to be emailed to her on June 1st. So, as soon as she gets that notification, she's creating that email telling her, "This is who you need to remove. These are the credentials you need to
087move remove effective this date." And then she's setting a date for it to send to her in advance. So that whole process is going to make sure that there's timely deactivation. Um, and as she's also doing that, it's going to tie back to that access levels as well. So it all kind of ties in together >> and it's the last paycheck when they get the >> the employee access piece. So, Miss Rollinsson is not going to be deactivated completely from the her from her own employee access piece until probably July sometime during that first week of July because she's going to get checks all the way up through June 30th. Mhm. >> So, she has to wait until she gets all of those checks and then they will deactivate her profile piece like where she
088because she needs to be able to go in and see like her check stubs or any of her own personal information. Okay. >> Um but she'll also like Elise when she does this she'll be able to deactivate her access to the student side. She won't need that anymore. And then she'll also deactivate anything that she has. >> Okay. >> Deactivates them as soon as they pay out. >> Yes. >> And they're done. Yep. >> So, >> okay. Questions on those findings? >> I'd like to aggravate a lease, but I'm not going to. >> Oh, yeah. >> Um >> I don't know. >> All right. Chair, we want to take a five minute break because I didn't get the break the last time for people coming up here and then we'll go to the uh second
089item on the agenda or our our discussion on the uh the travel and recognize Miss Whitehurst. >> Excuse me. Excuse me. >> Was all Jackie's fault. >> Oh, okay. So, at this time, we are um going to look specifically into the part of um audit finding one, which was around um mileage reimbursement. And I'm just going to read um directly from um the audit finding. Um this is on page three of the final report. Um it said effective monitoring of vehicle use through maintenance of vehicle logs or other records. Our discussions with district staff, comparisons of mileage reimbursements to the applicable employees, review of fuel station records and examination of toll pictures to close that for the period of July 24 through July through May 2025, one of 24 vehicles was driven 31,149 miles. And
090for the period February 2020 through May 2025, the district employee assigned the vehicle was erroneously paid $6,199 from mileage reimbursement claims related to the district vehicle use. In response to our inquiry, district personnel indicated that the employee planned to restore the $6,199 to the district and that the error occurred because reimbursement claims from employees with permanently assigned vehicles were not identified and rejected. So, this is specifically around mileage reimbursement and um the the finding that there was erroneous mileage reimbursements made. So, that's really what I just I have up here is the finding indicated um reimbursements from February of 2020 through May of 2025 totaling $6,199. Mr. Bowling did repay that full amount um before he separated um from the district. Um this was sent to um FDLE um for investigation and their report shows
091the following as being erroneous. um a mileage reimbursement um from January 25th through January 26th of 2024 um totaling 1575 one in April 30th 2024 through May 2nd of 2024 that one was 16348 February 26th 2025 through February 28th 2025 um the in the amount of 16380 and then May 5th 2025 through May 8th 2025 in the amount of 158.20. Their total was $64253 as part of their investigation. Their investigation um the summary of that was um very specifically that there was um no indication of criminal intent. It was really about what we've already talked about not having proper um controls in place and following procedures. So, Miss Wider, so when you you're saying that FDLE found that the auditor's report and what they had stated was erroneous. >> FDLE shows that these are the
092mileage reimbursements that they had definitive evidence of being erroneous. And I'm going to go through what what I've done. >> Okay. >> Also, >> all right. So when this came about, I did um reach out to um the auditors and ask them for the documentation that they used and they did give me the documentation that they used. That's the same documentation that I submitted to FDLE and it's also the same um documentation that has been submitted to um professional practices. So there is still an ongoing investigation with professional practices. um FDLE's has concluded and um what I had explained before and I just want to reiterate um the I had to conclude the investigation that would have if there was any discipline um that needed to take place. That's the piece that I concluded when
093Mr. Bowling separated. If he's not here, I can't I can't continue an employee discipline investigation if the employee no longer works for us. However, I did continue looking through the reimbursement and looking through the documentation um that had been provided to me by the auditors. I also went through because they did um show that this was all around and it was every single mileage reimbursement from February 2020 through May of 2025. And so what I wanted to show you today, and I'm going to make this larger. So, I want to make sure that it is. So, what I did was I went in and I pulled every single U mileage reimbursement that started February of 2020 and I went all the way through May of 2025. I looked at the fuel reports that matched up
094with any of these mileage reimbursements. And I have the dates, the purpose, the mileage, the mileage claim, and what the fuel record indicated from a date that was close to the start of that, and the end of that. So, I went through every single one of these, and I'll kind of talk about the color coding. I just want to kind of slowly um like everyone from those dates. >> And by the way, she was one of the best math teachers we've ever seen. pretty good job. >> That was a long time ago, Mr. Buckles. >> Um, so I do have some different color coding. I want to go back up to the top. The yellow, what I have over here is when I look at the fuel records, it is possible that the vehicle was
095used with that trip, but there's no definitive evidence. And that's that's what I want to like I want to kind of talk about like the difference in like what is possible because if it's possible it's also not possible because you you don't know for sure. Okay. So the ones that I have in yellow are ones that in my opinion I really don't feel like there was like it it is possible but there are some that the mileage doesn't add up as to what was on the fuel records or there wasn't even a fuel record for that time period. Okay. So like these two um for these two travel incidences, there was no fuel record that matched up with those dates for that vehicle. So if there's no fuel record, there's no indication that he used
096the district vehicle. To me, that is one that seems like it's most likely not erroneous. And I'm going to keep using that word because that's the word that the auditor used was that um erroneous there. And so that is how I went through this. So all the way up through 2024, January of 2024, there were not any that had any definitive evidence. And I honestly um I even really went beyond what the auditor gave me. I looked at toll records as well and there was no indication of any pictures of the vehicle on any of these other dates. What I have here is the trip to Finn in Orlando January 25th. There's dev def definitive evidence either a toll invoice with the picture. Um there's one of these and and I'm so sorry I should
097have indicated it. Um so it says tolls there. I know there's also one that there is some evidence that the ve the district vehicle was valid and so so there's there's um evidence there. So you have that one, you have the May 1st Finn conference in Orlando that was around tolls. You have um there were two on this one and that was definitive evidence. You have this one that was the Florida National Summit on Safety in Orlando. Again, you have tolls. So, I believe this one where it doesn't say tolls, this one must have been the one that there was the valet evidence, valet parking. And then this last one, um, the Finn conference in May of 2025 where there were toll evidence of the vehicle going through the toll. So, if you look at
098those amounts, and I need to make an apology because I did state something incorrectly when I went over this um, in November. Um, when I looked at my sheet, I gave you this number here, 61557. That's the subtotal of the m the travel reimbursements, the mileage reimbursements for the fiscal year 2425. Um, so when I went back and I continued looking into this, those five those five travel reimbursements that we have definitive evidence that they were erroneous reimbursements totals $81,572. So, as just a summary, when he had vehicle 174 assigned, there were 25 reimbursements. Um, no substantial documentation indicating the district vehicle was def definitely used. There may have been some that it could have been used, but we don't have the definitive evidence that that vehicle was used on anything other than possibility of
099what the fuel records are indicating with the odometer. So, Miss Wurst, um, >> what other definitive >> um, you know, to me that that the fuel records in that process that's used is, as we had discussed earlier, you know, there's a key that the person puts in that's assigned to them and it has to match the mileage of what the the district car, you know, that they're assigned has been using. Um, you know, I I don't think it's one of these things where you're going to see a, you know, a picture of somebody standing up saying, "Hey, I'm using the district vehicle." So, I I just don't understand that. >> Right. This one right here that I have highlighted. >> Okay. >> There was no fuel record of him fueling up of that fuel pin
100being used, that vehicle, the assigned vehicle on anywhere around February 27th. So there was no fuel record. So how I mean if there's no fuel record for that, there's nothing else that shows. How can we say that he did not use his personal vehicle for that trip? >> Well, how did the auditor say that? >> The auditor took everything from February 20th >> fe I'm sorry, not February 20th, February 2020 all the way through May of 2025. and they put every single one of those mileage reimbursements to come up with the $6,199. That's all I can tell you. I I am not the auditor. I don't know how they made that that conclusion. Um but there are definitely ones like here's another one March 12th. There's no fuel records on that. So the ones that
101I have highlighted in yellow, there are fuel records that could indicate Yeah. that that possibly could be. It is very similar to the mileage that was claimed. Um, so I'm and I'm just giving you what I have found. There's also one, let me go, let me find this other one real quick. Um, there was another one. Oh, right here. So, the mileage that was claimed was 603 miles. But if you look the same dates of that travel when filled up and like then the next time it was filled up the odometer readings was 315 miles. So how can you go like I mean again like there's 603 miles of the trip. There's 315 on the fuel records. Those two don't match up to me. I mean like if you have a trip that's 200 miles
102and the mileage record showing 250 that is I mean there's some possibility there but again I am looking at what do we have definitive evidence on. Um so the last thing I just wanted to um share is vehicle 255. So that was this um he had gotten a a second vehicle assigned. Not shouldn't say a second a different vehicle assigned. Um and we have toll invoices, valet receipt that indicate that those district ve that district vehicle was used in five of those instances. Um the other nine again like just there's not definitive evidence. And that's all I'm that's all I'm presenting to you is what is definitive, what could be a possibility, and things that just don't make sense at all because there's no fuel record or the fuel record is so far off from
103what the mileage claim was. I just don't see how that can be >> clarification. Can I ask a question? >> Yes, sir. >> And this is not challenging anything that you've said at all or your steps investigated. You said that you found five that you thought were probable probably uh where he probably received mileage reimbursement and used the district vehicle. The ones that are in highlighted in yellow are ones where you have a fuel record where the vehicle was filled up the day of or the day before the trip and then filled up again shortly after. So the ones that are in yellow like and >> they're probable. >> That's pro like it's >> that's my term but I >> Yeah. >> Did that include the four that FDLE included or not? >> No. >>
104Okay. So that's five in addition to the four that >> the ones that FDLE the ones that FDLE had were the ones that had actual tolls. Those are the ones that they said in their process. That's what they determined as definitive. That's where they came up with the amount of um the $64253. They did not include the one with the valet. >> If you included the five that you found, what would the total be? If the five that I have definitive on is 81572 plus. >> Now I I did not go back and add in the amounts of those possibilities. I could I could go back and add those in. >> I appreciate the clarification. That's all I was >> Yes, sir. No, those that I have right there, that total amount of the 81572
105are ones that we have the definitive evidence. There's toll invoices, there's valet invoices with attached to that vehicle like so there are definitive evidence there. There are several that there's possibilities because of fuel records, but then there's some that there's a mileage reimbursement and there's not even any fuel records that go with it. So, >> so quick question. Um, so in my discussions with the auditors and the information that they had given me, um, from basically June 24th of 2023 to May of 2024, Mr. Bowling pumped 832 gallons of fuel at a cost to the district of $2,459. From July 1st of 2024 to May 26, 2025, he pumped 1,481 gallons of fuel at a cost to the district at of $4,300. And in that, some uh according to them, two months of records were
106missing. So I I I'm just um you know in less than two years uh using 2,313 gallons at a cost of $6,5959 to the district. I'm just trying to, you know, h how that and and you know what we really need to do is have Ivo, the the the the auditor general's district director, come and speak to the board because in a letter to me that I asked him uh or an email, you know, explain to me, you know, look at read this FDLE report and tell me how theirs is so much different than than yours. And he basically did. Don's got the letter there that he can read, but he essentially said he didn't see anything in FDLE report that refuted any of of the information or any of the the audit findings that
107they made. So, I'm just, you know, trying to, you know, apples to apples versus, you know, apples and oranges. >> Yeah. The state can't find $27 million. >> That doesn't have anything. >> Well, you got an audit. You got audit fightings. We we went through with a process which is still ongoing with professional practices. Am I correct? >> Yes sir. That is correct. >> Still ongoing which I tried to explain to people in the parking lot the day of that meeting that this is going to drag because you're going to have different agencies involved. Then FDLE does their report and it goes on until this other's complete. I they're if they came back today and did another audit, I don't care how clean you think everything is. They find findings. That's what they do. That
108doesn't mean they're accurate as I said before, but it it I I Well, we we'll have an opportunity for each board member to >> Yeah. Could I process this thing? >> And I just I just want to make one one comment. Um >> Mr. Bowling was in a position 24 25 or 23 24 25. That is when we began construction. And I know that there were many times that he would go from Melrose to Crescent City, maybe even back like in like multiple trips around the district each day. Um, so I mean I drive 25 miles one way and I know I mean I I put an excessive amount of mileage on my car. Um, so if I'm making multiple trips between schools, it's just going to continue adding up. That that is all I
109just like want to say in regards to yes it may seem an excessive amount of mileage but he did an excessive amount of driving across the district in his in his job >> um with that because all the construction superintendents told me they rarely even saw him at a site that Travis Woods was a boots on the ground and and I just don't see where that I mean you could drive I drove back and forth to games for almost 14 years. Um, you know, I understand commuting and the mileage and also I think it's important we point out that, you know, he was driving that vehicle home every day back and forth for who knows from when was a violation of, you know, policy and and and knowing. So to me, he owes us money
110for that for using that. And on top of that, in my discussions with a former uh CFO, um, Miss Odum, she said she would ask him at the end of each quarter how many personal miles he had, which is mandated by the RS to be reported because that's income. And he would say zero. And then she'd walk outside, see him get in his truck, and drive to Orange Park or Jacksonville, wherever he lived. >> You know, >> I just wanted to, you know, you said a while ago, you said the board. Now, I got to tell you, just your tone and the language, no wonder the guy separated from the district. >> I never talked to him. >> Well, I mean, but in meetings, the way things were conducted, I I don't know. I I
111don't know. >> This whole thing has has >> I just want to reiterate the audit finding is around mileage reimbursement with the $6,199. And I'm presenting you information about mileage reimbursements. So the the ones that are white, they there's no evidence to support not >> there's there's either no fuel records or the fuel records the amount on the fuel records doesn't make sense as to like how that could could be. I mean like either the dates of the fuel records have extra days before extra days after. I mean, I'm not I I will tell you I'm not going to go and look at every I mean, we don't have the cameras doesn't save that long. I mean, so, um, I'm just giving you what I see here is I don't know like again, like even
112on this one right here, like I don't know how the fuel record started on February 15th. Like he filled up then, but then the next time that that vehicle was filled up at our pumps was on April 4th. And so like >> that must be the two months of missing data that they that they were >> you know and so there there's not any fuel records there that indicate that he received fuel. Um so so are we to he did use the the car he was issued or truck or whatever on the white ones too. I I don't have any I don't have any I don't have anything that says he he says that he drove his personal vehicle on some of these trips. I don't have anything that would definitively show that he drove
113the district vehicle >> on on the things that are white and and there could be some that like okay may maybe but I tried to be as clear as I could on things that really lined up when I highlighted it in yellow. Um, so I mean those are ones when I'm looking at it, the dates of the fuel records, the dates of the actual conference that seem to be a real possibility, but I don't know. I mean, that's that's all I can I can say. You know, >> Mr. Wagner, >> so I know you said that what Mr. Bowling said was that he used his personal vehicle. But um that's the first instance of Mr. Bowling saying anything about this entire issue as far as the paperwork we've received because um FDLE did not get
114to speak with him. And I mean I'm just looking at the overall situation. Um, according to FDLE, they did not say, I mean, language matters. They did not say there was no criminal intent. They said there was no evidence, >> correct? >> Enough evidence. Um, we all know that there can be something, as you just explained a minute ago, something could be, but there's just no evidence for it. um you know the reality is he he paid the money back um that he was was given from the district. Um I I have sat on I mean I've considered both sides of this and there's some very compelling arguments for certain issues but the reality is he paid this this money back. Um, I don't know of many instances where people pay things back that they
115feel is is something that they shouldn't be paying back. Um, I have a a concern that we I I loved the fact that you guys hired an uh private somebody outside to >> We were right. We were in the I was in the process of making those arrangements. They were going to be coming >> the week after Thanksgiving. Correct. >> And so there's no no reason to do that. >> Um so you know when we if we're looking at the doing anything with these the these monies that he had paid us um I think there would need to be a independent investigation >> um to to determine whether that's appropriate or not. Um, I understand your work and what you're saying to to me on this does somewhat make sense, but the problem now is
116is a matter of trust both for us and the community. >> Um, there's been no other investigation uh as to things that are correct or not. Um and and I I didn't care for some of the way in various locations the FDLE reports were um to me misited uh because they kept saying he he was he was cleared or he was completely vindicated. No, it said there wasn't enough evidence for for to show criminal intent. Right. >> And and that's just that's what they found and that is what it is. But >> I'm sorry. Sorry, I was just looking for one more thing. Um, they did state um even just well they were citing the audit that no criminal wrongdoing was identified uh in that portion of the audit only potential violations of schoolboard policy.
117So there's that that that schoolboard policy was violated. Um if we're going to delve into the the the specific amounts, you know, does he get this money back? is was this correct or not? I mean, I think it's clear from both of these reports that there was wrongdoing that occurred and that's the bottom line for me is that there was wrongdoing. Um what we do about that a moving forward if our policies are are changed to where this doesn't happen again, that would of course be good for the um the entire district. But I just I want our community to trust us again and I want our community to trust our employees and what we do from here forward >> uh at least my votes are going to be from that lens. >> You know,
118I I just I want us to be uh looked at as trustworthy and I've said this more than once that transparency is key. Um, and I appreciate your your information here and I just, you know, we'll see how the board proceeds on all of this. I don't know where we're heading. >> Mr. Don, you have any comments or >> I'll answer questions. I mean, I >> could you could you pull up that that email that um uh Ivo the director had sent to me where for the record? I believe you sent the the email to me and the superintendent and to Miss and to Miss Whitehurst and so I have that copy here. >> Could you just read his response when I was asking him, you know, I'd asked him, >> you know, explain to
119me the difference and then he >> sure I'll read it. It says, um, sorry I could not get back to you on this sooner. Things have been very busy with us lately as we try to meet the March deadline. I had a chance to go through the FDLE report and based on my understanding, it does not appear to contradict our finding. It appears to one, highlight the facts of the finding and two, draw a conclusion on their criminal investigation. The report appears to indicate that no evidence was developed during the investigation to establish criminal intent on the part of Mr. rolling and that quoting the discrepancies appear to stem from deficiencies in district controls, documentation, and monitoring processes as noted in the auditor general's report rather than deliberate fraud. End of quote. I must note
120that our audit procedures did not include an investigation of whether Mr. Bowling committed fraud. Also, our audit scope and procedures may differ from those of the FDLE, including but not limited to the different documents reviewed. And while the report highlights vouchers totaling $64,253, it does not appear to question or dispute the erroneous payment of $6,199 for mileage reimbursement claims noted in our report. Please let me know if this helps and if there is any way I can be of further assistance. Well, I I like where he said that he, you know, there was no definitive measure from them. So, I you know, based on what I see from FDLE, I don't have a problem with it. And and I don't and I go back to 10 or 12 years ago when a a husband and
121wife couple out of out of county were working here and the the lady didn't like driving the county car that had permission to drive and and so the husband drove the county car that was assigned to the wife and that was front page news. It was, you know, a lot of lot of things do happen. But, you know, I've I just think this whole thing has gotten a life of its own. I mean, you get you get people in the community that that think, "Yeah, go get this guy and throw him in prison. Do what you going to do with him." I I think it got further than it should have gotten uh and more press than it probably. Of course, I know that sells papers if you got people want to know what happened
122and that's fine. I understand that. But I I've known this kid since he was in school and that doesn't make that I don't have all the answers. I watched him when he went on out of high school and went into the military and then came back and worked here and his whole career and and I was over here at the old county commission room when Jeb Bush came to town to congratulate him from taking Mosley from an F to an A and uh brought all the state officials in and how proud everybody was. And I I just don't think it's in him to to just outright do something like that. But I'm just one voice. I I you know, so I don't know what the board will vote to do, but it'll be up to
123them. >> Mr. Pick, do you have any comments? Well, I I I do like Miss Wagner said, I if we stopped our investigation because the money was reimbursed um and we would even think about reimbursing the money, then I think you do have to investigate, you know, everything. I I think for us to make a good decision, um, we need to know everything that we can possibly know to make the right decision. And and I I've asked before, you know, who is it the auditor general or is it the FDLE that has, you know, why why are they so different? You know, um I' I'd like that answer. And um I'm not disputing that Mr. Bowling did a great job for our our county and and worked over and beyond um you know whether this
124was an error or or whatever, but I'd like to see you know more done if we if we need to. And one thing I asked Mr. Holmes was, you know, where did we sit legally with repaying the money? Um, do is there a precedence? Is there not? You know, those are things I question like is it within our bounds to not pay the money back if we can't see any other um, you know, if we see the numbers. So, >> so, so I guess I will talk. Uh this is a board decision, not my decision, but obviously I've got background in these kinds of things. Um so let me we all have emotions. We all like or dislike people. We all have preconceived ideas. We all know that human human nature. But when you're making
125decisions of the type that you're making or type a jury makes or a judge makes, you know, the facts are what you have to rely upon. Um, not whether you like somebody, don't like somebody, you know, think they might have done something else or whatever. So, let me let me just tell you what I see. Um, and I I'll start by concluding. They say when you make a statement, you should state what your position is and then say why and then state it again. There's a lot of truth to that. I agree with the comments made uh that indicate that we have a lack of certainty based upon the evidence that we've seen. The most detail I've heard from anyone about the charges has been from Miss Whitehurst. her her uh study of the of
126the fuel logs. I remember we didn't have a vehicle log to the best of my knowledge. Right. >> Correct. >> Um so, you know, her study of the fuel logs is is the most information I've I've seen on the charges other than the four which FDLE documented through toll records. So, um, and as I think, um, you noted there was not a statement from Mr. Bowling in any of the reports that I have. The FDLE indicated that u he had hired an attorney and the attorney had called and said Mr. Bowling wouldn't be making a statement >> um explaining or any wouldn't be making a statement. The auditor's report doesn't reference a statement from Mr. Bowling. So you at any place that I've seen. So you don't have a statement from Mr. Bowling. Um I
127did note that what what you have said uh and that is the uh auditor's report did in fact assume that the whole $6,199 for mileage reimbursements was erroneous. It says and and the quote is um the district employee assigned the vehicle was erroneously paid 60 $6,199 for mileage reimbursement claims related to the district vehicle use, but it doesn't say how they arrived at that conclusion. It doesn't give me anything other than a conclusion to work with. >> Are you aware of something different, Mr. Yeah, I mean it's when when I went through and um went into Skyward and pulled all of his uh when someone turns into a travel reimbursements as scanned, it's attached to that person. And I went in and I pulled every single one and when I put them in the spreadsheet,
128it came up to $6,198.76. So when I read the audit report, I read the conclusion but I didn't read a u basis for the conclusion and that's just fact you know I understand we all have ideas, thoughts, suspicions but that's that's the fact that I I saw also noted that and I'm just again I guess what I'm highlighting is the lack of definitive information and maybe if you choose to the need for a little bit more in-depth inquiry. But I also noted that the vehicle use 31,149 miles was over a 10-month period. Um the gas reimbursements was over a 63-month period. There was not a correlation. So they had the vehicle being used 31149. And I just did some quick calculations while I was sitting here listening cuz I had to keep my mind busy
129with this sort of thing. Uh, if you went if you went 10 months, which is what that amounts to, and you figured a figured a 22-day month, which is a roundoff, 4.3 weeks in a month, technically, that'd be 141.58 miles a day. >> Now, I'll leave that to you to decide whether that's reasonable or not, but that's what the mileage is. the reimbursement of 61.99 over 63 months. I don't know that it's relevant to try to average that out, but if you did, it'd be on the same same formula that I used before, 22 days in a month. That'd be roughly $447 a day on the reimbursement for the for the 63 months because they are, as I said, there's not a there's not they don't correlate. The time for the reimbursement and the time
130for the uh mileage don't correlate. So the FDLE report I mean and I'm not drawing a conclusion from that. I'm just stating that it raises more questions than gives me answers if I was looking at this from the perspective of where I go. Now again David to kind of to your point u and don't misunderstand this. I'm not trying to oversimplify or talk down to anybody but I it helps me to put things in context when I'm looking at things. So, in the regarding the question of whether he's entitled to reimbursement, which I I don't know that he's asked for. I mean, I don't know how I I have was contacted by his attorney. I declined to talk to him about it because I had not given had been given any direction by anybody to
131engage in negotiations on the reimbursement issue. So, I did not take that upon myself to do so. However, when you get to that that issue, the FDLE report was, as Miss Wagner indicated, very specific in stating that it just it did not find evidence of intent. It did find four instances where they documented that the district vehicle was used and a travel reimbursement form was submitted, but as you know, it indicated that the forms were filled out by an employee. The form does not have a blank on it to check use of district vehicle. It only had three three options. The employee said she just used that option uh in each case, which was it your personal vehicle, and submitted it for signature. And they ultimately concluded they couldn't decide whether there was criminal intent
132on the part of Mr. Bowling. That's not to say that he wasn't overpaid. And I liken it kind of to the situation where you go to the grocery store and you buy stuff and you're supposed to get $10 back for change and you get 50, but you don't look at it. You get a $50 bill instead of a 10. You stick it in your pocket and you go home and maybe you don't look at it until you get a call from the grocery store and they say, "Hey, we overpaid you 50. We got it on camera. Uh, and we gave you 50 instead of a 10." In that instance I just gave you on its facts, you didn't do anything criminally wrong. The clerk overpaid you. You didn't know it at the time you went
133home and you didn't discover it until somebody pointed it out for you. So, you weren't guilty of a crime. But under our law, in my opinion, you also aren't entitled to the extra money. You owe it back because it it's you didn't get the money. uh you didn't deserve you didn't deserve the money. That's one scenario. And then you got the other scenario in a kind of similar setting where you go to the grocery store, you're supposed to get 10 back and you get 50. You know it. When you look at it, maybe they give you five tens instead of one. And you look at it and you say, "My good, I just made 40 bucks." And stick it in your pocket and go home. you owe the money back, but you also took that
134money with the idea of taking someone else's money and making it to your use. So, those are the big distinctions there. It's not a question of whether you owe the money back in those two instances if you got overpaid. It's a question of whether or not you did it on purpose. And I think that's what FDLE, as I read FDLE's report, and it's a fairly brief report in all fairness. I think what they said was, "Look, he got four instances where he definitely got the money, but we can't say whether he got the 510s or he got the 150, whether he put it in his pocket not knowing it or whether he knew when he took it that he was wrong. >> My simplification, but that's, you know, that's that's the example that I use."
135>> So, from the FDLE report, I don't think it says that he didn't get overpaid on the other charges. It doesn't say anything about the other charges really. It just says it documented four instances where through the toll records and the pictures they could see that he was driving the district vehicle and he >> and he submitted or he signed a form requesting repayment. Similarly, the audit report just draws a conclusion that they were all erroneous. Uh the most information quite frankly that I've seen bearing on the question was what Miss Whitehurst just presented based upon her examination of the of the um of the fuel records. So you know from a standpoint of criminal intent I and again just my opinion um but I have a background in prosecution and I have a background
136as you know in determining who got prosecuted and I don't see how you would prosecute Mr. for bowling. Um, on the evidence that they're presenting, there may be more that I don't know about, but on the evidence that I see, I don't know how you would establish criminal intent with the employee saying she submitted it, she checked the box. You can argue about whether he should have read it, whether he should have read it more closely, whether he knew whether he drove anything recently. You can argue all that, but if you're going to prove beyond a and to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt criminal intent, it'd be a case that I'd be concerned about taking to a to a jury or or a judge. >> Now, whether or not he got overpaid, as I
137said, the most information I've seen on that point has been what Miss Whitehurst provided. and and I don't think if the elite provided anything and all the uh auto report provided was a conclusion >> anymore but I don't know what it is. So >> can I can I share one more thing? So I when when I started all of this process I reached out to um Ivo who is the um attorney general like he's the lead >> he's a district director I think. >> Thank you. Um and then Yimmy who was actually here involved in general, >> right? Um involved in actually going through things. And so I asked for the records that they used in this finding and the fuel records that they gave me. And this is this is what I was given
138copies of, which are the valet and the toll invoices. And then they gave me a fuel report for vehicle 277 that went back to November of 2020. Mr. Bowling didn't have that vehicle assigned to him until 2023 after Mr. Chastain left the district. And then that's when the vehicle he went from 174 to 277. So based on the information that I was given by the auditor general on the information that they looked at, they didn't look at fuel records for 20, 22, 23 on vehicle 174. If they did, they didn't give me a copy of that. I did that part on my own. I went and I got with Dr. spell the director of transportation and I said I need all fuel records for vehicle 174 starting in February of 2020 and then all of
139the ones for 277 starting from when Mr. Bowling was assigned that vehicle. >> Let me make it clear. I'm not advocating for >> I'm I'm just I'm giving I just want to give y'all the complete information that >> that I based this information from. That that's all I am doing today. Um, I'm giving you >> I just >> my findings. >> At what at what point, you know, do do you finally say we're going to move on to the next? Because the same people that push some of of your buttons in the community, push my buttons, and and yeah, they'd like to see somebody put in prison or or something. It's it's incredible the stuff that I've seen even on social media, you know, grown men making songs up about this guy, wanting him to,
140you know, just and I won't even go into naming them, but they thought it was funny. I just don't know how far you going to persecute somebody for something after they've been through all this. and why it it just I understand now listening again why he probably left the district and separated. >> Well, we're going to do this. We're going to do Miss Pickkins, then Miss G. Okay. >> And then then I'm got a couple comments and then Miss Wagner. >> I just have one. Um, so the fuel records dating back two years before he ever drove the vehicle, does that equal the 6,000? The 6,199 is from the travel reimbursements starting in February of 2020, which they said that it they looked back to February 2020 for an operational audit for the year 2425.
141They went all the way back to 2020 and from every travel reimbursement that he received, they include they totaled that up through May 5th of 2025 and that's where they came up with the $6,199. >> So they just they gave every like they pulled every travel travel reimbursement. They gave me fuel reports. So, these were the the things that I guess they went on when they made this finding. I don't know. I'm I'm not I shouldn't even say I guess like this is what I was handed as their documentation for this part of audit finding one. And it's only the fuel records for vehicle 277. It does go back to November of 2020, but Mr. Bowling was not assigned that vehicle. Mr. Chastain was still driving that vehicle when he was with us. Mr. Bowling
142was assigned that vehicle after he left sometime in May, June of 2023. And so I personally looked at the fuel records for vehicle 174 because I was not provided those. So I reached out to Dr. Spell and asked her to give me those fuel records. And that's when I went in and I put in this information. Mhm. >> So I just wanted to like make that a part of like what I am saying again my understanding when I talk to um Kim man is the auditors can if they find a wrongdoing or if they find something that doesn't add up they don't have to just stick with the year that they're doing the operational audit on they can continue to go back why they went back to February 2020. I don't know why they picked
143that date, but it was every single travel reimbursement from during that five 63month period. As Mr. Holmes said earlier, >> it's normally from somebody in the building or somebody's got an axe to grind start something like that. >> All right, Miss Gillard. Um I'm just going to comment on well first of all thorough job and that helped open my eyes to a lot but the report that the auditor general gave five erroneous facts. That's what they found. They said no criminal intent in a court of law. Madlock most especially cuz that's what I watch. No, I'm serious. >> I thought you were calling Don Mal. >> No, no, they Oh, no, I'm not. Oh, okay. I'm just saying. >> Yeah, me too. >> They they use the term um you know the the facts. You
144you state the facts and that's what they go on. And the fact that you're telling us that the highlighted area, >> they saw it, it matched up everything. the others you said to us and and and and if I misquote you, please correct me that there is not enough evidence to say did or didn't. >> I don't have anything definitive. Some are possible, some make no sense at all. So that's that's why some are in yellow, some are still not highlighted at all. And so my question is to us as a board are are what we're trying to determine today uh not criminal intent because that has already been spoken. What we're trying to determine today as a board do we reimburse or are we going over something that's already as far as I'm concerned
145been stated? >> I don't I don't think it's on the this workshop for y'all to take action. This is just this is just presenting information for then for y'all to have whatever discussions you hear and then I believe it could possibly be reagended at the next board meeting. >> And we'll continue to have people come out of the woodwork. Yeah. >> Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity. >> I just wanted to um >> to ask one question. Uh when did the reimbursement issue actually first come up? when >> the audit >> for us like for from Mr. Bowling >> for >> or like the reimbursement >> for the for the idea of us to reimburse him any of this this money. >> He submitted he sent a letter to us. >> Okay. Um and
146and my concern here too and this is why I think we need to have it investigated from an outside agency. I knew in early March that this was already being discussed and I reached out to Jonathan because somebody had reached out to me, >> a couple people and and wanted me to know that we were actually dis somebody was discussing reimbursing him. I reached out to Jonathan I think it was March 9th and by phone he asked me to put it into writing. So I did on March 9th >> I believe it was and the very following day I believe is when Mr. Bowling's letter. >> Yeah. I mean, and he had reached out to me and he was having conversations with me about um letting me know that he no longer had the attorney,
147>> Mr. Bowling. Yes. Yes. And that what would be the process if he wanted to try to get um a reimbursement of the difference between what the FDLE report had and what he had um paid back. And now I will >> again it's it's it's optics optics. >> It is >> I reached out before he ever reached sent that letter >> and like within a couple of days that letter was officially in in the district's hands but I knew about it. I didn't reach out to Jonathan right when I found this out >> and I never heard of it until Palaka Daily News. So that's that's a problem >> and and so I did but I wanted to address um one question Holly had brought up. you know the difference between those two reports and
148it really is just because the FDLE I feel is looking at solely is there were any criminal intent involved that they could prove and there wasn't um the auditors are not looking at criminal intent at all basically I mean u that's the way I read it um and and David just to touch on your point um about us dragging this out um I said this earlier to somebody I I I don't think that we are dragging this out I don't think this would have been an issue had it not been a request. So, because it's been a request to reimburse him this money, we have to address it. Um, I I I'm I mean, I really really liked Mr. Bowling. I mean, I still do if I saw him, but he was extremely helpful to
149me. He was always respectful, and I it just the whole situation has bothered me personally. But, uh, I I don't agree with you characterizing it that the board is dragging this out when there's a request that's been put to us. And I I think we have to decide how to handle it as all. Um, but just because and Sandy just because there's no criminal intent, that does not mean there was not improper acts. >> Oh, no. No. I don't >> you get no disagreement with me, Dad. My my whole thing is just if we're going to consider this >> at all, which I think, you know, there's a request. I think we have to consider it. Um I'm me personally, my position as it will be moving forward is just um I want to see
150somebody an outside >> an outside investigation um on it that takes the the information you've given and looks even deeper and and maybe speaks to Mr. Bowling. That would be helpful. and um and gives us more than the auditors and FDLE. I mean >> um I I just think we would be incumbent to do that before making a decision. >> No, I just want to clarify when I hear criminal intent my my mindset says arrested, locked up criminal. >> Right. Right. That sure that could have led. >> That's what I meant. Not saying that you were implying this. I'm saying uh the people that did the report said in my mind there's no reason to lock up. >> Yeah, >> that's what I'm saying. No, my >> So, you know, I don't I don't >>
151I do want to reiterate that the office of professional practices is actively investigating. Um so they are having conversations with anyone who has been involved in this whole process >> and they may take it teaching certificate. >> Um that that's that's around the teaching certificate. I liked the I I I really really liked when y'all said >> right off the bat, we've got >> we were like I had >> investigation. >> I had already made contacts with um an attorney group that is outside that doesn't have any kind of connections to the district. But I'm just going to say if if that is what y'all direct us to do, there is going to be a cost to that. And he could still say no, I'm not answering questions. And then there's still going to be
152a cost to that. So, I just want us to like understand like and getting an outside investigation to come in and do this will cost money to the district. Um, and I think that's something that needs to be weighed out as well. Um, so I I know that the the bureau chief of professional practices is personally the one doing the investigation um in what I have to submit to them. >> So, so do do they ask Mr. bowling questions and is he does he have to respond to them? >> It it is regarding it it's all about his teaching his um instructional certificate. So yes, he would be responding to them. >> All right. He only has to respond to them if they can guarantee him immunity. >> that is true because it is not
153>> everyone has a fifth amendment privilege against self-inccrimination and if in answering uh questions posed by a civil authority those answers are admissible in a criminal proceeding you don't have to answer. I mean, you can still assert your fifth amendment privilege. So, I have no idea whether or not they have that ability. I don't have any don't know any of that. But, but but but what I said is accurate in terms of >> they do have a different set of rules. >> Yeah. >> Which could be I mean, wouldn't that be the same if we did >> with an outside investigative firm? It could still be the same because we're not looking for criminal intent. Like, we're not investigating for that. >> No. But, >> Right. But So >> in the course of the investigation,
154his answers could still be used against him. >> FDLE found no basis at this point to proceed with charges. Statute of limitations has not run on a crime if there was one committed. He could still be prosecuted. I'm not saying he will be, would be, should be. I'm just saying technically he could be. So his fifth amendment privilege could still be asserted uh regardless of whether I asked the question, you asked the question or an independent third party asked the question unless he were given immunity >> you know on the whole on the whole issue. And if he was given immunity, then he would no longer have that privilege against self-inccrimination. And you know, you'd go from there. But um yeah, it's and then remember and one more thing, and I don't mean to go
155too far in the weeds with this, but you're talking about a lot of different standards of of proof. >> For instance, a criminal standard is proof beyond and to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt. That's a heavy burden. You know, it's often likened to pushing the sales scales all the way down. Those scales of justice. If you're suing somebody for money, you claim they owe you money back or they took money that they have money that they shouldn't be able to keep. It's a whole different standard. It's called a prepoundonderance of evidence. Is it more likely that you're you should win or more likely they should win? Big difference. I have no idea what standard the professional responsibility or what did you call them? Professional standard. >> Profession. It's the office of professional practices. I
156have no idea what standard they used. >> I believe it is the preponderance of evidence. >> Okay. With the civil I I think so. >> Okay. I'm >> Did they give a report? >> When it is finished, I will receive. Yes, it it'll Yes. But it's active. So I Yeah. >> All right. I'm going to make a couple brief comments and then we're going to wrap this up because we can't take a vote today. Um and um you know the superintendent will have to decide whether he wants to put it on the agenda um for our next meeting or a meeting. >> So you're saying a board member can't make a motion to put it on the floor and vote on it today? >> Not today. No, in the workshop workshop workshop. >> I forgot.
157I thought the meeting. So when I saw this on the agenda, I I was beyond flabbergasted and and disappointed because um as I as I had thought all this was behind us and that we could move forward with you know things that we really have to worry about and budget's going to be one of them. But you know I did send an email to the superintendent, Mr. Holmes, Miss Whitehurst, basically asking that they withdraw this because I had not been told had any information about it, nor had the attorney been talked to before it was put on the agenda. And I felt like at at a minimum that, you know, the presiding officer and attorney that we needed to understand why, you know, other than just the request. And so the superintendent, hey, we withdrew
158it from that. and the presentation that Miss Whitehurst did and and and honestly you did a fantastic job. I think that you there are more questions than there are answers. during this whole process starting back in August of last year when we had the meeting which uh was kind of the uh the the meeting that at the conclusion of the audit with the four Yim the lead auditor and the other three auditors who who are you know all CPAs and all have you know tremendous amount of experience in auditing you know made the report that the the chairman's there and then the superintendent and and the administrative staff, you know, when this when when it was brought out and and you Mr. Bowling was in that meeting and they pointed out their finding, you know,
159um he was surprised and and uh but but offered no comment and that that's fine. So from that point forward, I had I can't tell you countless phone calls uh with Yim about their investigative process. How'd you do it? You know, what' you do? Now, I'm not going to go into all those conversations and I'm not going to talk about them because there were some things that came that in their, you know, their interviews with Mr. bowling resulted in them doing more investigation and going back, you know, five years. You can just connect the dots. But irregardless, and I didn't know Mr. Bowling before I ever, you know, was elected in this thing and I don't have any acts to grind with him or anybody else. But and and I don't think that maybe there
160wasn't any criminal intent. I I don't have enough information to make that decision. I don't think any of us do. The one thing that I do feel that is very uh uh blatant and and that just I don't understand how this could h you know how that could that that an administrator that basically works out of this office and and irregardless of the fact that he was commuting back and forth 50 60 miles you know or you know 120 miles or whatever round trip a day that that 2,313 gallons of fuel at a cost of 6,500 uh you know $6,759 could occur in that short time frame. The other thing that we hadn't even talked about is the whole the hotel receipt on one of the trips where he claimed mileage $3,200 in that um
161which is you know uh if you look at policy 6550 you know it says that you should you know do the same thing under your as you would do personally in getting a hotel you would for the district. I mean it it that all that language needs to be cleaned up but essentially you know I don't know you know maybe on a on the salaries of the administrator get that they can afford $1,000 a night hotel rooms the other part of that which is the second part of this policy it says the district won't pay for any relative to attend you know and pay the expenses so there were two people in the and the receipt from the hotel shows that there were two occupants who was it you know I mean was it a
162family member remember. Um anyway, there's so many different things that I see here that just don't add up that had Mr. Bowling, you know, not resigned and and and could have said and explained these things, um you know, and and said, "Well, here's, you know, been part of the process to, you know, get to the truth and and understand, you know, whether it was in intent intentional or unintentional never happened. So we are stuck with what we are here now. Believe me, I I was not looking forward to this and you know um I would have never you know brought this to the board. if he feels like that um that he's owed repayment, then he should they should file suit against the district and and let and then things will come out because there'll
163be depositions and there'll be people under oath that will have to you know at at you know testify for those things and maybe we can get to the bottom line and find out exactly what happened. So that's kind of the, you know, the reason why we having this workshop today, so that we don't have to have this same thing at a regular board meeting. um you know and and and so between now and and if it's reagended you know I would encourage you to if you have questions of Miss Whitehurst and you know I would love for um Ivo the the district director for the auditor general to come down and and meet with us and and go into a more formal explanation of some of these things that maybe we understand. But, you know,
164I you know, uh would never question what that audit team did. And then the things that that that I found out through discussions with them why they did it. And and again, um the chairman of the board under any audit is the is the point of contact w with the superintendent. And so, uh that's that's all I have to say. And and so it, you know, I I don't think there's, you know, everybody's had their I think everybody knows what they how they feel and and uh you know, whether they need additional information or not and so we'll just see where it goes from here. >> Well, when you when you uh when you make all the phone calls you make as the chairman of the school board, and Mr. Holmes could have to tell
165me more about this and what I I feel like you may be exposing the district to liability as a board. Now, I don't know that. But if if I were to go out and start calling people and trying to find information, I'm just I'm just concerned that we if you're going to let this thing sit and you're not going to put it to a vote and >> you know you know you can't put it to a vote because you know it's not a board meeting then uh >> it I didn't >> I listen to your tone and I listen to >> Well, it's upsetting to me because I think that there's thousands of dollars. I never talked to him about this. not just just your your >> Well, he never talked to me. He never
166heard my tone or anything else. >> When you talk to people, it gets back through channels and uh but it doesn't matter. I mean, I'm I don't always hit the ball over the fence. Everything I do, so if >> Well, the discussions and the telephone calls I've had with the audit team was based on things that they brought to my attention and I wanted to understand who, what, where, when, and why. And you know, and there was a difference of opinion even on the audit team about the fraud issue, but as um the district director in his email to me said, they weren't they weren't investigating fraud. They were just looking at, you know, numbers and financial things. So, >> instead of focusing on the good things we're doing in the district, we'll get another
167day in the paper of a picture of like we've been having of of Mr. Bowling. then you'll come back at a another date and we'll get another good picture and take away from the good things that are happening with the kids in the district. And you know, I I think you need to go up or down with it and be done with it. And it looks like you got the votes to and if we go to a board meeting to uh to to not reimburse it. I mean, it's just the way it looks to me, but I don't know that. Well, I I can't agree with you more about we have more important things and there's good things that are happening, but I didn't put on the agenda to without any talking to anybody uh
168the reimbursement because that just opens up the whole can of worms again, which is exactly what I knew what would happen. >> It just drags it out. >> It drags it out. I didn't want that to happen. And, you know, and over $5,500. Uh, you know, I I I think it's ridiculous. the same people with the >> y >> fussing about the bond issues calling again and eating up social media. So it's all instead of kids getting awards. >> All right, Miss White, thank you for that presentation and uh no other business to come before the board. We will stand adjourned.