School Board Meeting- 8-5-25

001Call to order the schoolboard meeting for Tuesday, August the 5th. We'll open the meeting with the pledge of allegiance led by Miss Pickkins and invocation by Miss Gillyard. Please stand. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Let us pray. Father, in the name of your son Jesus, we have assembled here today to conduct the business and the take care of the affairs God of this district. God, we pray as always for your divine leadership and your guidance. God, we thank you that we live and serve in a country, God, where we're free to worship and to honor you, Father. Now, in the name of Jesus, we ask that you will continue

002to bless and keep us keep our hearts and minds focused, God, on the task at hand. But it's not about us. It's about our children, our district, and our employees. And now, as I share grace for moms.com, a prayer for our students. Dear God, thank you for the gift of education in every form. As our children prepare to start a new year, may confidence be their foundation. May grace be their guide and may hope be their compass towards a bright future. I pray they would have eyes to see the needs of those around them and a heart to love as well. May they face each day with positivity knowing that no matter what comes their way, they do not have to face it alone. Amen. >> Amen. >> Thank you, Miss Gillyard. Okay, board. We

003will move to our presentations and begin with B1 uh retirey recognitions. Miss White first. >> Good afternoon. Um it's it's always a pleasure to get to do this. And as we're kicking off a new school year, we're going to get to honor three who decided not to kick off a new school year. They're kicking off another part of life. Um so we want to start out by recognizing Miss Paula Simmons, teacher um most recently at Browning Pierce, 27 years with Putham County Schools. All right. Next we have Miss Stara Lawson who has been working with us in school food service most recently at Jenkins Elementary has served um Putnham County School District for 12 years. [Applause] And then our last one today is Mr. Sherman Williams who is um retiring from Melrose Elementary as the

004head custodian. And I believe that he has been at Melrose the entire time. >> Nope. >> No, >> you started at Interlank. >> Okay. >> 35 at Melrose. He's been with the district. I'm just going to go ahead and say 38 years. It's close enough. We're just going to go ahead and say 38 years. Um, so Mr. Sherman Williams, congratulations. Wow. >> Take awesome time. >> Yeah. Do not come back. Be successful at retirement. >> Wow. >> All right. We will move to item B2. CTE retire retiree recognitions. Miss Huff, you're recognized. >> Yes, sir. Good afternoon, board. So, back in the spring, these two ladies were recognized by Miss Whitehurst and as retiring for this year. And so we would like to recognize them as retiring as career and technical education teachers. So our

005first one is Patricia Sauls [Applause] and it says, "Thank you for 20 years of hard work and dedication. Career and technical education. Putnham County School District Health Science Teacher." All right. Oo. That [Applause] >> and our other one is Suzanne. and sites which I don't think I see her but she is retiring with 34 years of career in technical education as the bis as a business teacher at PLA high and she was also at interlockan high [Applause] >> all right awesome awesome miss we're we're more than happy to recognize her if she can come to a future board meeting. >> Okay. Yes, sir. Thank you. >> Mhm. Okay. Now, we'll move uh to uh item B3 um our board oversight committee report. And the chairman, Jared Dollar, is here to make the report. And Mr.

006Dollar, you are recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Board members, it's good to see you and good luck on a start next week. My wife's already back, so she's not real happy, but that's all right. That's what she signed up for. So, I'm here to give you your annual report for the bond oversight committee. I did send uh Chairman Liry a copy. Um he has the full report which I'll go over. I just wanted to recap what our purpose is, a little bit about what we've done the last year or so and then a couple of items of attention. We started in 2023 and if you remember, we're there to just basically watch the money that's coming in from the bond issue, see this being spent properly on the schools. Um, I do want to

007point out again that we see everything after it happens. Uh, we don't see anything beforehand necessarily. We don't review items uh before they are before the money is spent. Of course, we wanted to build six new schools. Um, we know that's not going to happen. We're going to have two brand new schools and revitalization of a few more and all in process. Good news is the Plaque Intermediate and Crescent City schools will be open next school year for sure. Um, and I think the one across the street from my house, Plaque Intermediate, it could be open any day it looks like, but can't do it in the middle of the school year. Um, I do want to point out we'd had some improvements to Horseman Club Road uh in the last month, which was a

008big deal for the neighborhood and that cut through road between 19 and 20. So, that's good news. Um, at each of our meetings, we are presented with timelines and project updates. Both of the current new schools had a contingency plan or contingency fund built in. Um, at our last meeting, both still had plenty of money. Uh, PLA A or PLA Intermediate was 80% complete. Still had a million dollars in contingency. And the school in Crescent City was 56% complete and still had 950,000 in contingency. And the contractor said that any big items that would have come up have already been addressed. So, I think we're in good shape there. in it's been a while, but November of 24, our meeting, we actually did get to go tour Placa Intermediate site. Um I haven't been in

009a brand new school in a number of years, and it was exciting to see what it's going to be. Um it is it's humongous, so I'm looking forward to seeing the kids in there. Uh I talked about the traffic situation a little bit on Horseman Club. Um, obviously when they start with Kelly Smith, um, redoing that, it's always, well, y'all have talked about it, but it's always been an issue coming off 20. So hopefully we can get some things done to alleviate the traffic there. U, our latest meeting was in June, and there were two items that I just wanted to bring to your attention. Uh, one, it kind of caught caught me off guard for sure. Um, but we were asked whether our committee as it stands now should be looking at the next

010set of projects. The school district has it broken into three phases. The first phase is the two new schools. Next phase will be Kelly Smith and Melrose. And then a third phase. Um, and my interpretation of what we're doing is we're to be a committee that see oversees any and all money that comes from these projects until we're not a committee anymore. Um, I was we were asked, you know, should we have a new committee? Should we not be looking at the next set of projects? And I said, we're going to look at everything and all the money that's spent until you tell us not to. Um, we're in three-year terms. Those will end in January coming up. Um, so it's up to you as a school board to either reappoint us, dismiss us, or

011appoint a whole new committee if you wish. So, that's one issue that came up. Um, the next, and we we've talked about this several times, and I think y'all have talked about it, is whether the school district should hire an actual construction manager at the district level. I know that we have architects, we have people that are working for the, uh, entities building these schools, but if you'll recall, uh, one of my issues I brought up last time was zoning and permitting. Um, those were dropped big time at Crescent City and Palata A. Um, and I think led to Plaque A not being able to open this school year as expected. Um, and it's I asked that question early on and was told everything was handled and it wasn't. Um, I think if we had

012somebody at the school district that was watching over every facet of this, um, I personally think it's going to get more complicated when you start rebuilding schools and not building from the ground up. Um, different things that you're going to have to watch from fire suppression to safety. Um, it's easier when you're coming out of the ground, but I think with these older schools, it's going to get more difficult. So, I ask that you consider that. Um, and then the last item, if you didn't already know, your bank account is full of money at the moment um, for these projects. We did issue the second round of funds um in June. The just so the public knows the total that came in was $103,134,424. Uh the reason we did it, we didn't do it early,

013but at some point those second set of projects have to start and we weren't comfortable waiting because to get those off the ground, we need money in the bank. Y'all need money in the bank. And as we know, the two schools are getting close to done, but they are going to go through the money, the first 100 million pretty quickly. Um, so we decided that we should go ahead and have the second one issued. That's done. The money's in the bank, and I think it was removed from the agenda today, but I know that the next steps are in process for the other uh Kelly Smith and Melrose. So, that's my report. And if you have any questions, I'll try to answer them. >> Any questions or comments? I'd just like to I'd like to

014thank Jared and the oversight committee for all you've done. It it's it's tough. It's it's aggravating sometimes and I've been to some of the meetings and watched and but I mean what you're doing is going to last the children of Putham County for 50 to 75 years. So >> we definitely get into some topics that are beyond probably our scope, but that's because they're everybody's passionate about it. So >> Jared inspects it on his golf cart. >> No, four-wheeler. My four-wheeler over there. four wheel. >> Yeah. >> And would you repeat the title that you uh that you suggested that the board look into hiring on the district level? What was that title? >> We've just a construction manager. I don't know what the title, but it >> there just a couple of things that

015fell through the cracks that I think if if it was a school district employee that that it was their job to watch these things through, I don't think that would have happened. And it's nothing against the folks that are at the district level. >> Yes. >> But they're spread so thin already. Um I think it'd be worth looking at. >> Yes, Miss uh >> on the um terms. I know I was at that meeting. Um who would it be? Who decides? I mean it's written in there three years. So, do we contact the different people we we appointed and see? >> Thomas, do you want to um address that? I know you brought it up in the meeting or what do you want Jared to address it? >> Well, I mean, I think we did

016a good enough job of addressing it. It's just a simple question, you know, and it was a question about the scope of the UC and um we're we're happy to go any direction, you know. So, I think it was probably or would probably best be determined by our attorney or the board's attorney >> um to interpret what the rules are. But, um it was more or less a question from staff. >> Right. >> Well, is there anyone that's saying, "Hey, I'd rather not be on it this year." I mean, when when the term is up. Oh, okay. >> And and in our bylaws, we can uh be extended one term. >> Um I don't think there's anyone that said they don't want to do it. Okay. >> Um, we have had a couple of maybe

017just one one or two replacements during the cycle. Um, but it's certainly I mean we have some time, but probably a good idea if you wanted to contact the people you did appoint, ask them if they want to continue and then we can y'all can do a resolution and continue it or if they want to be replaced. It's each person had two appointees. >> So, you could certainly do that. Miss Wagon, >> I just wanted to because going back to what you had mentioned about it's your purpose to make sure things are spent right with the bond money, but you always and we had that conversation during a board meeting one time that >> it really you're you're more of I think it was said you were more of a liaison between the board and

018the community with regard to the spending that's right already occurred by the time you see it. um if you were to start looking at the next phase now like you were suggesting, could that possibly change um in in such a way that maybe you could ask the questions ahead of time to where it would be more helpful, you know, before the decisions are set in stone. I think we it we could um one of the ways we do that is when we know for example y'all are going to have a contract to review or GMP or whatever the term is um for the next project if we if we scheduled our meeting a few weeks ahead of time to see that. Um my question to whoever is whether we're allowed to see it too early

019like I don't know if it's a bidding process when it'll be public for us to look at it. Um certainly we could um all of y'all probably know Dr. Hunter that's on our committee and he goes over every I and every T >> on everything and it's tremendous. Um so he he's doing a great job and he he does question stuff afterwards too. Um but if we saw it beforehand I think it would be good. I there's just been a couple of times where we had some input that maybe would have changed the decision. And do y'all do any other than your meetings being available, do y'all do any outreach to the community at all besides the meetings being public? >> No. Um I know our the video and the minutes are all posted on

020the revitalization site, but everything has to be in the in the open. So we can't really we could have a party if that's what you're suggesting. >> Long as we advertise it, I guess. >> That's all I have. >> And so um I was also Oh, I'm sorry. Did you >> No, sir. Okay. Okay. Um at at the last um bond oversight committee meeting and you know what what has struck me from day one is that um you know um Dr. Hunter who whether you all know it or not you know he's a PhD in both um civil engineering and nuclear engineering and headed up u with the the main company that built and designed all our nuclear facilities our missile facilities. So, I mean, he's overseen not just millions, but billiondoll projects, and he's

021been adamant, and, you know, I've talked to him uh specifically about, you know, having a building construction manager that had, you know, a degree and experience in building construction and that, you know, when you're talking $300 million in construction that, you know, to not have a professional like that, I think is, and I've stated it, you know, several times at the board, that that we're we're really missing the mark. And um so I'm not sure whether you know what the board you know as far as you know talking about that. Uh I think it's something we should discuss before we move forward with these next two projects and then the projects after that. Um but uh I I just think it's uh important. And I understand that um there's that as as you said that

022there are the the current employees all with the district have multitude of responsibilities and and I I don't think it's really fair to to put them in that position. So and I do believe it could be paid for out of the bond and and uh being familiar with those construction managers, they they basically go from project to project. So it's not somebody you're going to have a long-term tenure with. you'd have a contract with them for a year and a half or or two years and or maybe even three years depending on the construction schedule and then go from there. So, at any rate, that's my my two cent. >> All right. Any other questions or comments by the board? We have in past years had general contractors employed by the board uh to to

023do projects, but you know, normally when you to go into a like every other district in the state of Florida, when you go into a bond issue oversight, you wind up with with contract managers and and so I mean it's just whatever the board decides. Okay. Uh >> Thank you >> Mr. Dollar. Thank you so much for uh coming and and we will also be discussing uh uh resolution to either reappoint and all the board members will contact their appointees and and we'll go from there. Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you Jerry. >> All right. We will now move to public comment. Any public comment cards? >> Okay. All right. So no public comment. So we will now move to our public hearing on the consent agenda. And um Miss Wagner, I

024will start with you. >> Um >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Are we going to do the naming thing within the >> Oh, yeah. That that's coming up. Yeah, I got it. Mhm. Okay. >> Um >> No, I did not have anything to >> All right, Mr. Gillyard. >> Mine is L2, but I don't think it's under the regular consent agenda. >> L2. No, that's in >> Yeah, that's So, we're going to discuss that. So, so I don't have to. All right. Uh, Mr. Bus, I'm fine. >> Miss Pickkins, >> I talked to Miss France today. I'm good. >> Okay. And I would like to pull F3 and G1, which will be the committee >> three. >> All right. I'll I'll entertain a motion for the balance of the consent agenda. >> I'll make a motion

025we approve the consent agenda minus Help me here, Phil. E3 >> F F3 >> Excuse me. F3 and what else? Uh G1 G1 >> and G1. >> Correct. >> I'll second that. >> All right. And so I have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Motion passes unanimously. All right. I'm going to go to G1 first since all these gentlemen here that that that have to get back and make you know the big money they make uh that they get an opportunity. But the um the naming committee, which all of us um recommend appointments to that, is here. And um I will call whoever the spokesperson is or if all y'all want to speak. Um all right, John Raymond, you you were recognized to come up and

026tell us about this and the process and and what we will obviously be approving. >> Okay. Thanks, D. Um well on behalf of our committee and headed by coach Jim Mcool Jim called us all and wanted us to get asked us to get on board and we all did so and I think you know everyone >> right >> Charles Overturfs Sweet Owens of course coach Mcool Ben Bates who also was a coach for many of us >> Ben who I got you okay >> and Ricky Cerny I don't think I see him here Jerome Wilkersonson was also on the committee as well so I don't see him here today but also thank Thank you u to Thomas Bowling and Alice Keith for directing us and leading us through the protocol that's involved in this endeavor.

027Want to thank them and also want to thank the board for allowing us to be here today. Hoping that you will support and approve our request and naming the press box at Bennett Cooper Field at Veterans Memorial Stadium after Ron Dennis. I think all of you probably know Ron. If you don't know Ron, you probably heard of Ron. Um he's he's a palaca boy. He grew up here in the 50s and 60s. He was an excellent baseball player and basketball player. Um he uh was educated here, went to school here, went to college and came back home. Came back home like many of us did. Wanted to start a career and start a family. And Ron became a teacher and a coach, an athletic director, longtime administrator. And then he became the voice of Panther

028football. And he did that for over 38 years. We tried to calculate it the best that we could, but it's probably between four and 500 games that he announced on radio. >> Mhm. >> And that was home games, away games, playoff games. And radio is a whole different animal from being on the PA system and being when you're live streaming because you become the voice and the than the vision for people who couldn't attend the games and they're at home or in their cars listening to the games. And Ron was excellent at it. >> If you know Ron, he's a talker. >> And he uh was very animated in his broadcast. He was uh he was very accurate, statistically accurate in the broadcast, very informative and very creative. He did an excellent job for all

029those years. And when I say more than 38 years, Charlie brought it to our attention and he's right. He did some baseball games also for Panther baseball on radio. So, uh, but you know, he he's just done a wonderful job all these years and and most importantly though, Ron is a he's a family man. He's his wife of many years, Kay, and his children, Shannon and Katie. Uh he's also devoted to his faith, and he's devoted to Putnham County, in particular, Palatka. And uh he has been involved in so many uh organizations, charitable organizations, and helped raise so many hundreds of thousands of dollars. And I tried to figure out how many volunteer hours he's actually had over the years. It's immeasurable. I couldn't even calculate it. He's still doing it. So, uh, it is

030with our hopes that you will support us on this endeavor and that you will name the press box at Bennett Cooper Field at Vetmor Morris Stadium after Ron Dennis. I think he we all think he's so deserving of this. >> And he is Yes. I just wanted to ask a question. >> This is the same Ron Dennis that grew up on President Street a block away from where I live. It is correct. >> It is. He's the same one that was double alt in basketball as is number >> it is >> and baseball and the same one that hit a lead off triple in one of the state championship games. I think I know who you're talking about. And he worked for the school district for many years. and the foundation that we had, Putham

031County didn't have a foundation to provide student awards >> and Ron went to Duvall County and and mimicked a foundation put together that like they had in Duvall and for decades and still I guess now we've still got the education foundation but that's it was brought back because a former superintendent let it lapse into a school and then it went under, but now it's back. But Ron Dennis was the the ramrod for that education foundation which provided hundreds of thousands of dollars of awards to kids if not millions. I, you know, you'd have to go back in all the years, but I think I feel pretty good about it. >> Yeah, Ron Ron is a very special person. Like I said, if you don't know him, u you've probably heard of him. Very special person.

032make him mad as anybody. Me and Jim are cool good at making him mad. So, >> well, you ought to be on the golf course with him like sweet and I was this morning. But anyway, uh yeah, we just feel like this would be a small gesture on our part committee. Thank you so much for serving and making this recommendation. Coach, thanks for being the lead on this. And so, the chair will entertain a motion on G1. >> Mr. Chairman, go ahead Sandy if you want to. I >> All right. We'll have comments. >> Well, you go ahead. You make the motion. I'll second. >> I would make the motion that we accept the recommendation of the committee and name the press box after Ron G. Dennis. >> Second. >> All right. I have a

033motion in a second. Discussion. Board. Your opportunity to make any comments you'd like. Everybody's happy. Who Who could who could not be in support of this? All right. We have a motion and second. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you again. >> Thank you so much. [Applause] >> Okay board, we will now go to F >> three which I pulled. Um and specifically um my question and well about all of them the appointments um as pursuant to the statute um are supposed to be a recommendation from the superintendent in writing which I guess you know this is a recommendation in writing um but for the positions that are being filled um it's supposed to be a specific recommendation and um So spec the only one that I'm concerned

034about and that I've have object objected to or had problems with for for over a month since going back to June is the purchasing director. And um essentially um the this should have come to the board um prior to the purchasing director being hired and that's what the statutes requires. And um in a meeting with Mr. Holmes and myself and the superintendent and the human resource director, take one and pass it down, please. Um last Thursday, I thought that was going to be the case. Um but I see it's not. And and originally I thought I saw on the original agenda that we received that there were recommendations of not just the first director but two other positions in the instructional side for approval based on what the statute requires. um you know I uh

035was made aware of um the process or what was happening with the uh the retain the the hiring process of the purchasing director. So essentially it was advertised and Miss Gillyard I think you asked me a couple of meetings ago probably two or three weeks ago maybe a month ago you know which one which job description did I have a problem with and I said well I have a a significant problem with the purchasing director job description which I rewrote completely uh sent one that was based on um the indust an industry standard and sent that along with um uh in an email to to our human resources director and said my recommendation after I had reviewed all three applicants that had applied and all of them were you know either working for the school

036system or doing consulting for the school system. Uh and I said none of them are qualified. none of them meet the minimum qualified qualifications of purchasing director and and that is um you know having a bachelor's degree and I'm it says desired but I'm just assuming that that would be in business management or an affiliated field and have significant amount of purchasing experience in that we're not hiring a clerk we're hiring a director to hit the ground running. So, in that email to Miss um to our human resource director, I recommended that she take the the uh the job description that I had promulgated, take that to the board for approval and then revertise the job and her response back to me was just received. Well, that didn't happen. They moved forward with it. They

037hired um the applicant and now we're in a position as a board um to make a decision on hiring somebody that had already resigned their job and and and somebody that's completely unqualified for the position. Um, I I did some some additional research on this and and with respect to the the application and the resume of the proposed applicant and called their former employee and asked if as was stated on the resume, had this applicant ever done any purchasing or procurement or anything? The answer was no. from the procurement purchasing agent and her assistant and I think that was confirmed by the u the assistant uh county administrator for business management. So, you know, I'm I'm for doing the right thing and hiring the right people. I mean, this is a you know, based on

038our budget this year, a $447 million business. our businesses producing educated, you know, kids and um purchasing with all we have going on with new construction in that process. Um for us to have nobody that that really has any qualifications or experience, including our purchasing coordinator, he came here. He wasn't in purchasing either um to do this. I guess my biggest question is, you know, why move forward so rapidly with this when that position's been vacant for five years and all of a sudden, you know, we got to have them tomorrow. I'm not, you know, I'm not looking at who the person is specifically. What I'm looking at is strictly the qualifications and would we hire a purchasing director to be a principal? I don't think so. But, you know, maybe if they had worked

039as a purchasing director in the school system, maybe they'd qualify. Um, so I personally cannot support this um this appointment. And I'm disappointed that, you know, y'all haven't received as as I understood as was told only one other board member had gotten any backup information on this. >> Uh, >> no, you you'll be right. Let me finish. Um so so I'm I'm and and it's been made very clear by the board attorney. We've had three meetings uh to one with the superintendent and the human resources director over a month ago before Mr. before the purchasing director uh was offered the job. The second we had in the board meeting where Mr. Holmes presented um case law that supported the statute which says we will review um the the uh qualifications, the um uh job description,

040the salaries, and then we make a determination based on the recommendation of the superintendent that wasn't followed. Um, and we had a meeting just last week where this came up again and it was clear uh that the what what we Mr. Holmes and I were told was that well if we waited to hire people until every you know for in between every board meeting we wouldn't get anybody hired. And I'm like and I don't want to speak for the attorney but his comment was well that's not what the statute says. So essentially the statute was not followed and um you know I don't consider this uh meeting this statute and irregardless of you know what's been done in the past um the administration was aware of this going back over going back before June and

041um so I would um pastor Gav and Miss um the vice chairman I would u make a motion to approve all the appointments in F1 except the purchasing director ctor position. >> Madam Chair, can I make a comment? >> Well, after we after we had the motion on the floor, needs to be a second before discussion. Like a motion. >> Second for discussion. >> You all right? You second for discussion. >> All right. Now, now comments. >> Could I have U Miss Wyers come up and respond to the chair's comments, please? Yes, sir. Um, so I just want to um go back through um the the statute and my understanding of our meeting when Mr. Holmes was in there. Um we talked about the the qualifications which we discussed, those are approved by the board

042through job descriptions. The positions um that is the second item that is listed in that statute. those um positions are approved by the board through personnel allocations. And then the only thing that we did discuss that um is not entirely by statute. And then I explained to Mr. Holmes how we did that because even if you look at our um the personnel matters that you have right now, the first person on there was someone who was working or working at NEP and their effective date was July 1st. because we have to have the agenda um uploaded a week before. You have to have that in a timely manner. You can't keep positions open until you have a board meeting. If we had a if we needed to have an emergency board meeting in order to

043approve personnel matters, we would be having an emergency board meeting multiple times a month because we hire people and we have start dates throughout the week. like it is we have start dates of people multiple times a week and so I was explaining to Mr. homes that anytime that we hire someone, they're always under a probationary contract. And if it is not approved, then they're under probationary. They would be dismissed. And he asked me if we have that in writing. And I explained to him, I said, "No, that is not in writing specifically, but it is um stated that it is a contingency because final approval is not until the board approves it." And so we discussed me adding that statement to our onboarding packet. moving forward and there will be a statement added to

044our onboarding packet moving forward. Um I I mean if if someone has a better way of doing this, I've looked at board agendas across the straight across the state and it's the same way. I mean I I don't know how for y'all to approve every position and every person that we need to hire before that hire date. Not unless y'all want to have a meeting multiple times a month because that's what it would require. Um, so, you know, based on my understanding and based on practices in human resources across the state, based on what we hear from HR attorneys, um, these practices do meet that statute. >> All right, Mr. Holmes, would you respond to that, please? >> What's that statute number again? >> 10122. >> 1222.2. 22. >> So, it's always kind of awkward

045when someone is um quoting back and forth from a meeting that was held previously that wasn't recorded. First of all, uh I don't know that I understood that you said that the employees were hired and placed on probation and that was basically your idea of compliance to statute. I asked and understood you to say that it was a contingent hire, i.e. you're being hired contingent upon board approval. That's what I understood you saying. >> Correct. And that that is >> that's my idea of probation. Now you I may have a difference in there but my idea of probation you hire but you understand that you have six months and if you don't perform well in that 6 months or 3 months or whatever then you may be terminated without having to pay a severance package.

046So I don't equate probation with a contingent or conditional hiring. Um and but I did say and I and I still would say that if in fact you're hiring specifically contingent upon board approval. So you're it's almost like a placeholder, >> right? >> Then I could understand how you could um you could find that to be compliant with the statute. But what I also said was there's nothing in the statute that says that if it's not convenient for you to get the board's approval on an appointment from the from the superintendent that it's okay if you don't do it. >> And and I you know I don't really know what other um HR attorneys are saying or what other school districts are doing. I I think I used in that meeting if we're going to

047rehash it's I don't know how many times I've you know heard the the uh comment well everybody else was doing it and you start teaching your kids at about age four that everybody else doing it doesn't make it right and >> correct >> in my in my business the this is what matters >> and interpretations of it so all I had done from day one was simply say that the uh the statute 101222 basically specifically states as to hiring that the district school board shall act upon written recommendations submitted by the district school superintendent. And I'm not saying that this isn't a written recommendation. I don't know that that that's not something I would really want to quibble about. If there's a written, you know, list that comes from the superintendent and it's coming to

048the board as a recommendation, that's sufficient in my opinion. But it says for positions to be filled for minimum qualifications for personnel for the various positions and for the persons nominated to fill such positions. So I mean and I did research that if you recall we had some conversation earlier >> because there was a contention that well the the board's function is basically prefuncter. Uh they they they really can't reject a recommendation unless there's some extreme cause. And so I provided uh case law that said basically that in that case um the board had the right to say that um someone who had been hired with a master's degree in finance wasn't qualified to serve as a chief finance officer because they didn't have school finance experience. I'm not saying whether that was right or

049wrong decision on their part. I'm saying that the court found that to be a legitimate cause for not approving the the superintendent's recommendation. So so my take and this statute has been in place for a while. It's not been changed. If the legislature wanted to change it, uh they they could have should have, but it says the school board shall act the school board shall act upon written recommendations submitted by the district school superintendent, skipping over for the persons nominated to fill such positions. The district school board may reject for good cause any employee nominated if the third nomination by the district school superintendent for any position is rejected for good cause. If the district school superintendent fails to submit a nomination for initial employment within a reasonable time as prescribed by the district school

050board or if the district school superintendent failed to submit a nomination for remployment within the time prescribed by law, the district school board may proceed on its own to fill the position. So from my my and then it goes on to say the district school board's decision to reject a person's nomination does not give that person a right of action to sue over the rejection and may not be used as a cause of action by the nominated employee. So when I read that in context, it's clear to me that the board does have a function that's not peruncter. And all I've said from day one, it's not for me to get into whether someone is qualified specifically. That's not in my lane. Um, and quite frankly, as you know, I don't interject a lot, but

051if I'm specifically asked my thoughts about a statute, then I I feel like it's my obligation to state my thoughts about that statute. And in this case, my thoughts are that the board has not just a right but an obligation because the statute says you do to consider the recommendation, the nomination of the school superintendent for positions. And it doesn't say all positions above a different level. We went over that. I actually kind of thought it might, but it doesn't. Right? >> It says all positions and it doesn't say that, you know, if it's you don't have enough board meetings in a month and let's just skip this. we don't we won't worry about this statute if there's not enough board meetings in a month for us to comply with it in a convenient way.

052It it just says that that the that the board is to act. So my thing was uh I I understand there's a practical side to to business and you're you're uh you're a business in a way. Okay. I mean, you're a business of educating kids, but my thing was I I get the fact that if a if a person is willing to sign on on a contingent uh appointment, understanding that their application nomination is going to be considered by the board and the board may or may not approve it, then I understand the problem with that, especially if somebody's already got a job and they're having to give that job up or they choose to give that job up in order to be a nominee. But I I don't I don't see anything in the

053statute that gives you an exception. And if and if somebody can point to one, I'm sick to death to to look at it and and offer an opinion. But until then, >> uh I'm not. And I asked you, and you're right. I said, "So was Mr. Helms," because we were talking about that particular appointment since we're going to get into that discussion. I said, "So was Mr. Helms told that that his appointment was contingent?" And you said, "Yes." And I said, "In writing." And you said, "No." >> Correct. >> And I said, Well, the lawyer in me says that probably it ought to be in your package that this is a contingent appointment and that the board, you know, may or may not reject it. That's and that and that that's accurate correct >> and

054that's so I'm not criticizing I'm not weighing in on anybody's qualifications. I think that's outside of my lane. I'm not saying yes or no. I'm just saying that >> and you know I think I also told you then I've had the privilege of representing a lot of boards over the years. I don't tell any board what they have to do. Never have. Never will. I'll tell the board in my opinion what the law says they should do, right? And then >> my my goal is that if something happens and someone accuses the board of not fulfilling their obligation, I feel like I've failed if I haven't made sure they understand what my opinion of their obligation is. >> Correct. >> And as an attorney, I think you might understand that. Um maybe hope the rest

055hopefully the rest of you can understand it, too. So, I'm not trying to weigh in and be on anybody's side. I've got a statute to look at and and so that's that has been my opinion exactly as as I've made it. So if Mr. Helms was hired on a contingency, he understands that he resigned his job to take a a position that the board might or might not approve and the board doesn't approve it then then it is what it is. On the other hand, if the board approves it, then fine. But I think the board it is for the board to make a decision and I don't think it's a peruncter one. If it was, I don't think you'd have all this >> correct >> print devoted to it in the statute, they'd simply

056say, >> well, you know what they could say. So, sir, >> I'd like Mr. Chairman to give a little history on purchasing positions, transportation positions. >> Yes, sir. You're recognized. >> Human resources positions in Putnham County Schools. uh to look at the candidate in question was a high school principal for years, ran a million-dollar budget out there, but it was it was not uncommon and has not been uncommon for in the past Putinham County School District to have a purchasing director that had no college education. It's also not uncommon for uh a transportation director in Putnham County School District that didn't have a background in in traffic safety and transportation. They might have been a human resources director or a principal or whoever was selected to lead the transportation department. Human resources the same way.

057They don't have to have necessarily, unless the board sets up some type of qualification that they're dead set on doing that would bar someone that could do the job, a human resources director. You couldn't put a longtime principal in human resources. And my perspective, like I told you guys in the last meeting, is is dealt from the options that the school superintendent has. And obviously the board has to work and we can make it as difficult for a school superintendent to operate as we choose to do. We can make his job miserable like many school board members do across the state of Florida. Or we can try to find ways that if in the event a principal had a sickness or an illness, we've got somebody running a a department that could go in and

058cover a school and save us $100,000. It's I understand the lingo with uh our attorney went through and that's that's his job, but I also know as a school superintendent you need the latitude to be able to place people where you feel like they can most benefit the district and at what time that would be. Um so I mean the young man is is a longtime educator. He's a product of Putnham County. That doesn't necessarily open the door and say he should get whatever he wants, but I mean, he's operated and managed a million-dollar budget over the years and hundreds and hundreds of employees and dealt with thousands of students in Putnham County. So, I I don't have a problem with accepting the recommendation, but that you guys would have figured that after the last

059few meetings when I've kind of >> well zeroed in on but >> one question, Mr. So sir, you believe this board >> should hire directors in positions where they have no educational background, no experience, and we're paying them $100,000 of benefits. I mean that I could understand if it was a clerk position, but you know, we're we're running a half billion dollar business here and to hire people, you know, on the job training. Maybe that was the case, you know, in the back and it worked well. But things have progressed to the point where it's imperative, I believe, as having been in business and having, you know, been worked in local, state, and federal government that we have qualified people, especially when it's a director position. I mean, uh, so we're going to pay somebody

060a hundred and whatever thousand dollars a year to be to to be on the job training. And then what happens if we get sued, as Mr. Mr. Holmes pointed out, to uh to the human resource director and the superintendent, our meeting, one of these bids that our contractors submit, multi-million dollar bid, uh, gets challenged. And what are they going to do? They're going to call the purchasing director to court. They're going to ask testify, and I'm paraphrasing you, uh, Mr. Holmes, and they're going to ask you, "What's your experience, and what what certifications do you have in purchasing?" And they're going to say, "Well, none." So, what do you think's going to happen? The district's going to be sued and we could end up owing, you know, millions of dollars. So, >> you can you

061can you can end up owing millions of dollars. And if that's the most qualified person in America and they make a mistake, you can still wind up owing millions of dollars. So I'm telling you, when you got people that can handle jobs locally that are local people and they know the community, they know how to build and what's important in a high school if if he's going to be working in that area. And we're looking at Interlockan High School coming up in the future and then Palaka High. I see it as invaluable experience, but okay, >> I just I look out there and I see people in the audience that were principles that wound up handling some of these district level jobs and over the years and retired. >> Okay. So, your answer to my

062question was yes. >> My answer is is is that I'm going to support the recommendation from Mr. Helms. >> Okay. Any any other board comment? >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> I do. um simply because I was also looking into this and um one of the reasons that I was delving into this more and Miss White verse has been very helpful in discussing things with me. Um, you know, I'm not I'm a longtime resident of Putnham County, as you know. I'm not a longtime resident of Palaca, and I don't know everybody's families and grandkids and and all of that, but I've had people in the community reach out to me multiple times. I spent two hours on the phone with one uh a few nights ago. Um, very intelligent people that are asking very intelligent questions.

063And I feel it was, you know, I felt at that point it's my duty, not just one person, several. And and um I felt obligated to at least look into this, you know, if I can find some information to provide to them that says this is why we're doing this and this is what's going on. You know, maybe they were wrong about some assumptions, all that. I just want to they're asking for transparency and I'm trying to help provide that. Um when they contact me and I appreciate them contacting me, but they had seen our board meeting and um they supported some of the things that Phil had brought up. So I was looking into that myself and was actually going to talk to the about this at the end of the meeting, but I

064didn't know Phil uh was bringing this to the to the table today. So I just wanted to say in response a little bit to David Um, you know, I totally understand sometimes the way it's been is the way it's been because it has worked well and and I and sometimes it's you don't want to fix something that's not broke. And I agree with that. Um, at the same time, being an attorney, I I go by this as well. And it I do have one question for Miss Whitehurst while I'm at it. Um, in paragraph number four, right in the middle of the the statute here, I'm sorry, not 4B, it says the district school board shall act no later than 3 weeks following the receipt. Um, and I don't understand some of this, but following

065the receipt of statewide standardized assessment scores and data under sub uh section 108.22 22 and school grades or June 30th, whichever is later on, on the district school superintendent nominations of supervisors, principles, and members of the instructional staff. Now, I don't know specifically where this uh position lands in that, but you had mentioned if we were going to approve everybody, we'd have to be meeting multiple times. That gives us three weeks at least on certain positions. that that position is not one of those. That would be positions that are directly tied to student data >> is what that is what that's talking about. Yep. >> Um but it it spec it specifies a time period there of three weeks. >> Um and I'm kind of surprised it doesn't specify uh something right >> for anyone

066else, but >> they at least had considered a time frame for some of them. Um, and if that would be possible, it seems reasonable to think we could uh still do it if they give them three weeks. So, I don't know why we couldn't. >> So, are you asking for within like 3 weeks after the hire I mean before the hire date? >> It says within three weeks. This says because of the categories within three weeks after receipt of >> the standardized assessment scores and June 30. said it's kind of Mr. >> I I really don't think that applies to this position though in all fairness. Now I'm not saying that I've got all the answers but this does state that the context of this when it references standardized assessment scores and data under 10822

067would seem to specifically direct that passage to the instructional staff supervisors principles and teachers. That would be my read on that. But it just it seems I'm just trying to pull from that though if you know if there's three weeks for some folks. I mean it I just seem to think there should be some middle ground here where we can be compliant with the statute and make the decisions we need with trying to keep the efficiency of the district happening. I don't have an answer on how to do that, but uh specifically to this situation in this one particular u position, I don't know the person in question. I I just know that it's being questioned by at least several of my constituents and perception matters. I've said that before in our meetings and so

068I'm just trying to figure out what did in fact happen. Um, I know I I was questioned whether the position had been advertised. You confirmed for me that it had been advertised the same way as everyone else. That that made me feel a little better on that. Um, but I I do have to agree with Phil if and and the board attorney if we are not subscribing to what we're supposed to be doing. Well, I would just say then that means every person on here as a recommendation because there's not any date on here that is beyond August 5th for any of these recommendations. So if that's what it's being based on, then you cannot recommend any of these people. I mean, you cannot approve any of these people because they all have a date

069before today. >> That 3 weeks is not a mandatory waiting period for >> I I just other than instructional personnel trying to insinuate that. No, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, but I'm just trying to make sure that we keep it kind. >> But there are people on here that's not instructional. Then they had start dates of July 23rd, August 4th, July 7th, August 4th, July 23rd. and and so >> I mean that that's that is supposed to that's that point is supposed to suggest but >> you know I think that again the the statute's pretty clear but I I too do understand that you can make a contingent hire and by far and away the run-of-the-mill I shouldn't say run-of-the-mill but ordinary hire is going to be one a teacher a

070principal I I mean that's a relatively that's a skill set that you're everybody's relatively the selection people are relatively familiar with you know if you got the teacher certificate and so forth and so on I mean the odds of it not being approved are probably pretty small but the statute again doesn't say below a position certain level above a certain level it says everybody is going to be submitted to them for review and so I I have would I would have no I would offer an opinion which is all I do is offer opinions I don't I'm not a king. I would offer the opinion that, you know, if it's a contingent hire and and that's what you're doing effective August 4 and you're presenting it to the board now, >> I don't see that

071running a foul of the statute. You know, as long as everybody understands that they're not obligated to rubber stamp it just because you've told the person they can come on and start working >> and that they're they got a contingent hire. Because if that becomes the case, then this statute means nothing. Correct. If there's going to if they were going to say unless the HR director has already decided to hire them because it's not convenient to wait for the board to meet, they could put that in there if they wanted to. It might be make your job a lot easier, >> but it's not here. >> Correct. >> And all I all I'm doing is looking with what working with what's here. Well, and it wouldn't be uncommon for a superintendent to send or a

072HR director to send principles or assistant principles to Indiana State University to looked at at hiring prospective administrators or teachers. Uh it wouldn't be uncommon to send them to Louisiana. I mean, I've been sent to Louisiana and hired people and and you know, Tim Adams was hired that way. And it wasn't by somebody with some kind of, you know, required board. I I don't know. You know, I understand, but I'm ready to make a motion. >> Well, I'm not ready for a motion. >> Well, I'd be ready just as quick as you are, >> Miss um Well, we're operating under Robert's rules of order and parliamentary procedure. Every board member gets the opportunity to speak once before a board member can speak the second time. Thank you. So, >> Okay. I was just I was

073just going to ask uh in the job description you said there there was a part of it that you were concerned about and and it's not necessarily well it is uh specifically focusing on having done the job of a a purchasing >> a purchasing director. >> Okay. And >> not not just a a purchasing person but a purchasing director. This is a senior level position. All right. >> Okay. Because >> you have a question, Miss Pickers. >> Oh, okay. >> Oh, are you finished? I'm sorry, Miss Oh, >> no. I was just gonna say because I was looking at >> right >> the what what is listed here strategic leadership, procurement, and bidding, >> you know, and you know, as a >> Yeah. And that >> purchasing uh budget management and regular, but you said

074it had to be director. >> Yes, ma'am. Uh >> that's what I'm I mean, that's the way I read it. >> Okay. >> All right. Uh, Miss, before we go to you, Miss Pickkins, did you have any other comments? >> Um, well, I I do have some comments. >> Go ahead. >> Um, >> you're recognized. >> Thank you. Um, you So, you you made a job description that you felt was adequate. >> Correct. a current uh uh a job description that has been used recently uh in the private sector that is also a kind of a very similar to what we used in the public sector at USDA. >> Okay. And um and that was before we advertised for the position. >> No, that was after the the advertisement been made the there had been

075and and the job was advertised two ways. internally and on the Indeed website, not in the state associations of purchasing directors or any affiliated purchasing organization, which to me is you might as well just hung a sign up out there on the bridge. Um, but we did get three applicants, all school related, um, either former, current, or con or consulting or contractors. I reviewed all those and they were none of them qualified, not even remotely qualified to the inadequate job description that we had that needed to be rewritten. So on June 24th before uh the applicant was hired, um I sent that email and and said my recommendation as a board member is that the board review the new job description, approve it, and then readvertise it. nothing happened. So, does that answer your question?

076>> Um, yes. >> Okay. >> And so, um, Miss Whitehurst, in the job description, the person didn't necessarily have to have a bachelor's degree if they had experience. >> Right. And the the person that we have recommended has a master's degree. >> Has a master's degree. >> I'm sorry. >> Is it in his masters? Ed, leadership, >> education. Okay. >> And then the second qualification refers to um experience in >> I I have it right here. >> Business environment and what is the next piece there? There's a part about >> directly involved with school operations. >> School operations and management and he has several years of that experience. >> Mr. Chair, can I make a comment? >> Yes, sir. Mr. You recognize >> Thank you. Um, did did the board not approve the current uh

077job description recently? >> No, sir. That job description we've had for quite a while. So, we did not bring it back up for approval because I mean, if we have one that's been approved before, we use those job descriptions unless there are significant changes to it. >> Okay. Thank >> Okay. We >> I do have one. >> Yes, ma'am. Go ahead, M. um the person that we are discussing um I served on an insurance committee this the district insurance committee um and he doesn't have a degree in insurance and he's probably he's at the top of understanding insurance and so um I've also witnessed him creating a great environment at at a school. And I think that's, you know, extremely important. Um, I feel like if you're going to I I just feel like no

078one that applied had any of these job requirements. >> We had more than three applicants. It was narrowed down to three. the three they interview >> and that they that those three received a phase one um any support admin position. We do two phases to interviews and we always give them a scenario um where they have to do written responses and two of the three that we sent that to um responded, one did not. So, we took those two and we did interviews and we have a rubric and we rated it and this person scored um significantly higher than the other person that we interviewed >> and your committee >> and all of that is following our um hiring protocols that we have in place. Yes, there was a committee >> the the interview the

079the committee that who the representative who the members of the committee that reviewed it reviewed that >> myself um Patrick Wnek from NEC and Jonathan ODM >> right okay >> oh okay >> all right any other comments >> all right you have a question go ahead >> just going back to the statute and everything um the attorney had mentioned you had said that that this position was made um contingent that he knew it Darren, I mean it's all of our employees understand I mean we say it it's in board policy that the board has final approval on any appointment and so they are contingent. It is not written as this is a contingency offer until board approval and that is one of the things that I said is that we can easily add that statement

080to our onboarding packet and have them acknowledge that. I I do I personally think that's important because like the liability we were talking about. >> Um I am not a a negligence attorney, >> but I do remember a few things from law school and one of them is negligent hiring. >> Um and if you have someone that's not qualified or not trained well enough or any of that in a position, correct me if I'm wrong. Um but and something happens and whether it by their negligence whether it's a decision or if it's a physical act you can be held responsible for negative hiring because it is up to us to make sure people are I don't I I haven't seen a resume um on this person or anybody else. Um, so I don't know the

081qualifications, but uh, so I can't speak to that, but I'm just trying to make sure at a minimum going forward, I want to make sure that we are um, complying with the statute. I mean, that that without >> Yeah, I want to make sure we comply with statute. I >> I'm a rule follower. >> And and I'm just I again, I think there has to be some common ground here where we aren't doing it just because it's always been done. and and we're doing it transparently in the sunshine and all of that because um the community needs to have faith in our in our procedures and >> if we can't agree on whether we're following a statute or not then how are they going to have faith you know so I just want to make

082at least at a minimum going forward and I think we're going to discuss >> that that will be >> that will be added to our onboarding packet as an acknowledgement >> all right any other comments the motion failed order. >> So, I believe Mr. Buckles has a motion that he wants to make. >> I'd like to make a motion that we accept the recommendation to hire the purchasing director as presented by the superintendent >> and all of the other >> Yeah. Would that need to be all of F3? >> Help me procedurally. You said the motion favor. You got a motion second. >> We didn't vote. We just hers was a second for discussion. >> We were under discussion. So, take the chair back. >> So, we have a motion to accept. >> No, no,

083no. We got to do the motion first. >> It was the >> No, she said accept all accept purchasing >> the the director of purchasing. So, we had a motion and a second to accept >> um I don't know the number on the agenda. >> F3 minus the appointment of Mr. Helm's position, director of purchasing. >> And we had a second. >> I have a question. So we're So your motion is Say that again cuz yours was for discussion. >> My my motion which was seconded um by the vice chair was to approve all the appointments under F3 with exception to purchasing director. >> So that would be to disapprove. >> Correct. >> Okay. If I just want >> Well, I mean, I think you've got to ask another mo. I mean, you have to

084have another motion. >> I think technically that you made a motion to approve everybody on the list with the exception of the purchasing director. You didn't say to reject them. You just said everybody else on the list, >> right? >> In my opinion, if you passed that motion, then everybody but the purchasing director would be approved. There could be a second motion then to approve the purchasing director. I just made that motion a while ago. >> But you can't make it till after this. >> Well, I want them to call the question and let's go ahead. Fisher cut bait. Let's go. >> I think they were trying to figure out exactly what the motion was and what its impact would be because I don't think it would be necessarily a rejection >> of Mr. Helms

085as purchasing director. I think it would just not be an approval in this motion leaving it open for someone to make a motion with regard to Mr. Helms. That's my opinion. >> That's question on the motion. >> Yeah. question on my motion. So just for you to vote on it. >> Okay. So we are voting on his motion to approve everyone except for Mr. Hel. Is that worded correct? >> The purchasing >> the position. >> Yes. >> Um okay. All in favor say I. >> I. >> And the better do by roll. >> If you left if you left Helms off a no votes affirmative vote in Robert's rules of order. If I'm I may be wrong. Am I Am I wrong on that, Don? I don't know. >> No votes in affirmative. >> Well,

086she said I didn't vote. I I don't know if you were talking about me. >> I don't >> Yes, then. >> I don't know who she was talking about. I I don't know who all voted. What? >> Right. So So we've just voted to accept all the people on the list except one. >> What was the vote? Can I just clarify that for the record? >> Well, I saw a couple say yay. I didn't say anything, but it doesn't mean I said no. >> Okay. I don't have >> I don't think you have a record that reflects what the vote was. I'll just leave it at that. Let's do >> Can we do a roll call? >> Sure. >> For clarification, what we voted on was to accept everyone >> except the purchasing director. Correct.

087>> And then we can have a motion. >> Sure. Because if and then in this think about this way. If the motion had been to accept everybody on the list but specifically reject the purchasing director, >> that's a different motion, right? But that's not what the motion was. >> It was >> the motion was to approve everybody except the purchasing director. So that leaves open the question of the purchasing director, which you can then handle by separate motion. >> Yes. >> Okay. So if you're happy with everybody on the list, but the if you're happy with everybody on the list and you're taking the purchasing director out of the list, then you vote in favor of the motion that Mr. Liry made. Yes. >> Roll call vote. >> All right. Roll call. District one. >>

088Yes. >> District two. >> Yes. >> District three. >> Yes. >> District four. >> Yes. >> District five. >> Yes. >> All right. So, everybody's approved by Mr. Helms. That leaves that question open now for a motion. >> I'd like to make a motion that we approve the superintendent's recommendation to hire the purchasing director. >> All right. Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second. So discussion. So any any board want to make any discussion have any comments before I start? Okay. This is absolutely in my almost 40-year professional career the most position that I've ever been put in. Um and I can tell you that I'm not happy about it. Um had we just and and listen, I'm one board member. I'm I'm you

089know uh I'm not never spoke for the board. Not not trying to say I'm just saying in my professional experience having hired purchasing directors and been an administrator in government and in private sector that as a director that the applicant did not meet the qualifications. Neither did any of the other applicants but the successful candidate. Um, I think this was handled extremely poorly and it also put the applicant in a very bad position because he had resigned his position and had already come to work and you know um I guess you know either assuming that the board it would just be a preuncter approval or that they had the votes. Um, I'm not happy about being put in this position and I can promise you that if I'm ever put in this position again, um,

090there will be consequences. So, um, I can't support the motion. uh but I do feel uh that we need to follow the statute and we they're going to be you know follow the statute and have a professional staff with with both education experience and qualifications especially at the director level and you know uh I don't think that being a school principal which he was an outstanding one and I will say that uh he's he did an incredible job and when he was with the school district and if we were hiring for a principal, I'd be the first one to stand up and say, "Man, let's get him right now." That's not what the case is. So, with that, uh, we have a motion in a second. >> I I I need to make a comment.

091>> Okay. >> And I I need to clarify what you mean by consequences. >> Well, >> to me, to me, you're making a some kind of veiled threat to the administration about our recommendations. >> I I can tell you that, you know, >> tell me what your Tell me what the consequences are. What what is the consequence for anybody that doesn't follow the statute? >> You tell me. You're the one that said you brought it up. >> You don't know. >> No, I'm asking. You're the one that made the comment. >> Well, tell me what you mean by the consequence. >> It's an ethical violation. >> Okay. So, what happens? >> Goes to the ethics commission. >> Okay. >> I mean, you know, you ask Mr. Buckles. He's been through the ethics commission. It's not

092>> You've had your share of stuff, too. So, we're all kind of painted with the same brush from time to time. So, what I'm saying is >> I think the attorney's been very clear on on the way the process goes and I think we'll decide in the the the later in the agenda on L2 who we're going to want to look at and I think that you know the instructional side I think that the state qualifications and and uh licenses and education required for uh teachers and administrators is is all you know straightforward and that, you know, I'm not an educator. We got three on here that are um and so I would um acquies to their experience and recommendation from that standpoint. All right. So, we have a motion and a second. All those

093in favor signify by saying I >> I >> opposed like sign. I >> I >> So motion carries three to two. Okay. All right. We will now go to Did you get >> the We are now into finish consort agenda. We're into No. All right. All right, we'll go to uh new business in L1 and u the discussion on uh new business uh amended acreage purchase at 221 Round Lake Road in conjunction with the Kelly Smith Elementary School. And who's Mr. Bowling or who's going to or Mr. >> Sir, >> are are you doing my respects to the gentleman? >> Okay. All right. Mark, is it you or Mr. bowling gonna handle this. >> Which one were we on? >> L1. >> That's all right. >> Used to it. >> Travis is our surveyor and

094Mark is here on behalf of the ball. This is about um the property that we have under contract from the balls. >> All right. So, you're recognized. Okay. Um I'm I was brought here today. Um we're working for Kimley Horn, the engineer. We were hired to provide them with a boundary survey of this 10 acres along with the remaining school parcel, the topographic information so they can design. >> Could you just for the record give your full name and your address? >> Yes, sir. Thank you. >> I was going to ask about that. Uh Travis Barono, um 1309 Southeast 25th Loop, Sweet 103, Ocala, Florida, 34471. >> Thank you. You proceed. Um we we've worked on many school projects in Marian County with Kimley Horn and they asked us to come up here and work

095with them on this one and uh we had a couple different um task at hand and one of them was this 10 acres that you guys were looking at um for Mr. for being bomb. And when we got up here, um, we had done our initial like research in the office and used the state road maps for 20 and 19 to kind of break down the overall section and um came up and realized when we started going around that some of the corners were conflicting with the other corners that we found uh in the area and started going back and doing our research and kind of figured out what was going on. Um, back in the mid 80s or early 80s, there was a a farm that was broken up by a gentleman out of

096Manor Ridge, a surveyor that's no longer practicing. But, um, from the thought process of it is is he held some corners that were forestry corners um that aren't quite where the actual section line is. They're like markers for the timber people when they're timbering to say, "Hey, stop." They usually stick about shin to knee high and you can hit them as you're walking through on the fire break. So I I believe what has happened is the surveyor from the '8s came located these corners and held them as like the section corners and broke down this piece of property that the been balls owned or well that they had purchased. Somebody at the other time had owned it at that time and they they broke down their breakouts uh of these individual parcels. Um the true

097section lines run about due east and west and these run about a degree and a half off. So, we have this kind of overlap situation. Um, and we've met with the owners of these parcels and kind of explained to them what's going on. And, uh, we met in the field a couple weeks ago and kind of came to the decision that they wanted a a little bit of a buffer. And there's a 66T easement running through there. And we decided we would hold that north boundary of the easement line um, and and create a new parcel that would be a little shy of 10 acres. I think it's 9.46. 46 is what we've recommended. >> So, initially the board signed up for 9 and a half acres um and then when you did your initial

098survey um it seemed as if we were getting about 10 and a half acres. The problem with it was we were taking up a right of way that he mentioned a road that they use uh and then actually some of the neighbors yard um which we had no intention of doing and and you know we weren't that's not what we illustrated to the board to buy to begin with. So, what they're actually that what we're proposing is to shift the boundary line up um to where we originally thought it was to begin with, getting the acreage that we intentionally thought we were buying to begin with without taking up neighbors properties and infringing upon their um this privacy. If we if we own part of a yard, we have to put a fence in it

099because of schoolboard property for liability purposes. And we don't we don't want to do that. uh we went out and we spoke to all of the neighbors and we kind of had a gentleman's agreement on the table that we would do our best to bring this to the board and and you know just give you the facts. Um we don't need the property that and and the property that we do need is what we understood we were buying to begin with essentially. So, for clarification, if I could, >> we've got a diagram uh and I don't I guess it's not up anywhere, but >> I think you guys have uh printed copies of it. >> Yeah, it's on the agenda, too. Under under the agenda, you don't have this. >> You mean can local baros?

100>> So, >> Dr. Bargenda, >> if if the diagram I'm looking at is the one that you're referencing, it shows a shaded area that would be on the easterly side of the property. and it runs north to south. Is that the property we're talking about? >> Uh I'm I'm not >> Can you I'll step around and come look. She's looking at a survey >> and has got the shaded. I'm not sure what he's looking at. I just want to make sure. >> I'm pretty sure >> you're on the board agenda. Board agenda for this item. >> Same thing that Miss Pickins has got up on her screen. >> So, um what what was your question? I apologize. I was trying to >> That's all right. No problem. Do you do you need to see this

101to see if >> No, we're looking at the same thing over here. We're looking over the same thing. >> Okay. This is posted on the board docs as under this agenda item. My question is >> there's a shaded area >> that's to the east. It's the easterly side of this uh survey assuming that arrow points north as it does with most surveys. >> Yes, sir. So there's a shaded area on the easterly side that runs north south and you're talking about So are you only talking about the northerly boundary of that shaded area or are you talking about the entire shaded area? >> No, that shaded area is to the east of this project. That's the actual road. Um forgive me, I don't remember the name of the road, >> Brown Lake Road. We're talking

102about what you guys refer to as Donnelly Road. Um they're they're the skews there. If you look down at the very south end of the map, you'll see all of the neighboring parcels that we have been referring to um there the um the degree and a half that I was talking about when you push that line through based on it um it it encomp it encompasses power poles and um columns and fences. Everything from the 80s was built off of these monuments. >> And the south line is we're holding the >> south line of the well the north line of the 66 ft easement as the new schoolboard parcel. This this line >> technically you guys were looking at purchasing all of this down here and they Mr. Thomas said there's no reason to have

103>> have all of that extra stuff. So, so I think I'm understanding thanks to Mr. Spalding and and I'm not any you know disservice to you. I just didn't understand what we're talking about. I had I see the shaded area and normally shaded area is what I direct my attention to when people talk about property dispute. But you're talking about then there's a heavy dark line that's on the south side of your survey. Yes, sir. Running east and west. And then below that are dotted lines. >> Yes, sir. >> And Mr. Spalding indicated to me that the heavy dark line would be the north boundary of the 66ft easement. >> Yes, sir. And so what basically we're talking about is essentially retracting the description of the property that school board would be acquiring so that

104it would be consistent with that north line of the 66T easement. >> Um correct that is >> and then the property south of that which is the easement. >> Uh and also I think that's what kind of pours over onto some of the neighbors property too. Yes. >> We would basically not be including that in the description of what the the board purchased. >> Correct. My recommendation was for us to write a mess and bounds legal description versus the eloquent parts that it's described as now um to clean up some of the stuff and then after we're done working with the homeowners to to kind of clean up what they've got going on. >> And when I did appear at the U city commission, actually I think it was the planning commission first in in

105seeking annexation and comp plan and zoning. There were some of the neighbors that were there. They were very courteous, very very nice. But they did indicate that they were concerned because they had felt like they had been tending that property, uh, cared for it, manicured it, all that, and it thought it was theirs and, you know, uh, >> thought there might be now a boundary line dispute. And, and so from my perspective, uh, you know, it would be something that would be received, well received by them if the school board were to accommodate them by by not taking in that 66t easement. >> Yes, sir. um that I know like I was saying the the the stuff that's built out there was built to those monuments that we found in place to be out of

106that that aren't correct in the correct positions. Um they they've been there since the mid to early 80s and everything was built that way and when you start trying to move stuff you're going to run into all kinds of problems. So, we felt the best way to solve all this was to just hold the north line of that 66 ft easement and um you know it would give a little buffer between the houses and the school and >> yeah like like you like what you've heard. I mean we can make this as difficult as we want and we can try to force our way in even got imminent domain if we wanted to take it but we don't want to do that. We want to do what the superintendent and staff have recommended. So, I

107think that's where I'm coming from though to to go ahead and even though we have the right, even though we can do it, doesn't mean we have to do it. >> All right, board. Any any questions for the surveyor or >> because we have enough to do what we need to do and and and still maintain a cordial relationship. >> We got way constituent extensive. >> So, I say >> all right. So, if everybody's good, I'll entertain entertain a motion on L1. >> I make a motion we approve L1. >> Have a second. >> I'd have a second. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Carries. Huh? >> Second. >> Uh, Miss Wagner. >> All right. We will move to consensus to advertise new policies. >> Okay. Dave. um and both the

108staff AI policy and the student AI policy that was in the packet and uh pretty pretty well explained. So >> Okay. Yeah. I I did ask uh >> Mr. Lennon Hardy if he would come up just just by way of sharing what it is because it I had some some concerns and and once I he explain you've been using all along but anyway and and and Mrs. Pickings had some I had a an uneasiness. >> Thank you. You're recognized, sir. >> Um Glennon Harvey, IT director for Putham County School District. So, uh I first kind of want to let everybody know that y'all been using AI for years and years. So, um I'm just kind of go over some things that is under the AI umbrella. So, uh, Tik Tok video recommendations, Instagram reel, that's

109all AI. Spotify, Pandora, uh, those recommendations, suggestions, that's AI. Uh, virtual assistants, when you call your bank and it's listening to, um, you know, I want to talk about my accounts that there it's using AI technology. Um, voice activated phone systems at banks, avatar creations. I'm taking my phone and I'm doing um what is that one app? Snapchat and putting filters on my face. >> She does it all the time. >> That's that's that's all AI. That's all AI. So um >> um some of the AI that we're currently using in the district is uh Amir Learning. Um we also we're going to be using Google Gemini. Um so AI has built up over the past couple of years. Um, chat GPT is one of the most popular ones. Um, we don't allow students to

110use chat GPT within our district. What we are going what we want to allow students to use because they're using it anyways. They're using it um when they go home and then they're doing book reports um and AI is not able to >> or you know we have programs like Turn It In that spots some of the um >> plagiarizing >> plagiarism. So you're AI. >> AI is too advanced right now. >> AI. >> Right. Right. Right. So what we want to do is put some parameters, put some structure around AI usage for both staff members. So they're not putting in personal identifiable information, not putting in pictures of students, not putting in um names or anything like that to make a seating chart. We want to protect our students, but we also want to

111make sure that we're putting parameters on the students. And if they're using AI, tell them, okay, if you're using it to um I mean, don't use it to do book reports. Um site your stuff. Um don't use it for nefarious purposes. So, we just created policies um for y'all to um look at and um just kind of give parameter structure uh for uh using it ethically because it it's happening. It's here and we need to embrace the system. >> And as I read it, my the first thought came to my mind, not uh if a student does this, >> yeah, they're already >> it's a win. It's a win. And that that you explained to me about deep fake. Oh my word. >> So yeah, there is deep fake where um in I don't know

112that it's happening in our district, but there are apps where you can put someone else's face or your face on another person's body and say that they put them in a uncompromising position. I mean that's that's happening out there. Um we we see that on news reports. Um we see our our president is being deep faked. Um, so, um, we just want to make sure that we are telling the kids if you are caught doing this and you're using it for nefarious purposes, we have documentation that says you're not supposed to do this. I mean, I and I think I included in the policy um, and this is for the principal to decide if they want to do that. Um, have kids sign off saying I understand how I'm I'm supposed to use AI and

113if I use it in a way that it's uh, against the policy that I can be reprimanded for it. So, we just want to make sure that we put that language in place. >> Yeah. And I want to say too that uh Lyndon went through a long process of vetting this. Um I know we had a training recently and principles, directors and that type thing. Had a chance to comment on it on both both the student and the >> Yeah. And we even talked to students. We started with students. We uh got with leadership team. Uh we talked to teachers at the Navigate Summit. So, we've had like a lot of input on creating this policy. um just so we can make sure that everything's covered um and just kind of do what some of

114our other partnering districts are already um doing. So, we just want to make sure we're staying up to date. >> All right. Thank you. Question. >> I just I had a question, but Miss France explained it to me. I didn't like how it said and other um it listed chat GBT and then it said and other you know things that might come al and she explained it that you already know what like another program that >> and we specifically mentioned all the ones that are in Clevver. So there might be some more that um there might be some other programs that we adopt, but anything that we put in Clevver and that's why we mentioned Clevver then those are approved by the district that would be approved by >> said that they would be it's

115not like it it'll be up in that little waffle. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Where you Yeah. So you can >> I mean thank you for that. >> Yes, I'm good. I was uh I was very pleasantly surprised to see that because in any you know in any company or governmental entity policy takes forever to catch up with uh technology and uh I you know the the hands-on usable AI stuff regular AI has been around for a while but not the stuff that we're using on a daily basis as much and um so I'm I'm real happy to see us have a good >> policy gift. >> And you know what I used to create that policy? >> Yeah, >> I just found GPT over the last month or so. It's very dangerous as an attorney

116in particular because it gave me the best case I could have ever thought of to site. And if I had not gone to look at it, I would not have realized it didn't even exist. >> Yeah. >> So, it's not always correct. >> I told it yesterday when it gave me a response. I said, "You're wrong. I am allowed to do this." And he said, "Thanks for the correction. You are absolutely right." And then it changed it, but it wouldn't have done it if I hadn't said, "You're wrong." So, definitely it's one of those trust but verify kind of. >> And we are partnering with a business that is providing us um great um uh instructions for our staff members uh once this is adopted. Um we did this during the Navigate Summit where we

117had 60 teachers. um they were briefed by a business I don't want to mention a business name but um uh just gave a lot of great information on how to use AI um ethically and uh we're going to continue doing that um and make sure that our staff members are trained. So >> all right, any other questions or comments? Uh Mr. Harvey, thank you so much. Uh great explanation and and a good backup in the uh in in the agenda item. So board, we will uh I'll the chair will entertain a motion on L2 for the consensus to advertise the new AI policies. >> I'll offer a motion that we um that we do L2 consensus to advertise new policies, staff AI policy, and student AI policy. >> Second. >> I have a motion and

118second. All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Motion carries unanimously. board. We will now move to consensus to advertise amended policy 5200 which was also in our packet. Uh any questions, comments or concerns? >> Okay. >> No, but I do think um when I was talking to Miss France, the 50% of the school day and it's, you know, it's going to be tracked. So I students need to understand that >> and and if I understand that right, Mr. Super Yes. that if they're not there, then we don't get credit for that day under our payment plan. Correct? >> My understanding. Yes. >> All right. Okay. All right. Well, in that case, we will chair will entertain a motion. >> L3. Oh, you made a motion. >> Did you make Mr. Chair? I offer

119a motion uh that we um advertise uh the amended policy 5200. >> Okay. Second. >> All right. Have a motion. Second. All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Motion carries unanimously. L4, the consensus to advertise the amendments uh to the bylaws and policies as uh stated here. Do we need to read them into each one individually? >> I do not believe so. They're stated. >> All right, >> chairman. I make a motion to approve the >> Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Go ahead, Mr. Make the Motion. >> Yes, I'll make the motion. >> Now, I'm going to ask All right. Have a motion to approve. I have a second. >> Have a second. All right. Discussion. >> Yes, sir. I just It was the one I printed it out regarding mothers um

120nursing the babies. Yeah, here it is. Um >> 4425. Yeah. Nursing mothers and everything is deleted. I mean, there's a line that went through everything. So, is that one no longer? >> There's one right there. >> 4425. So, the one next to it is the new one. So, they got rid of all of this and took in that one. Okay. All right. I'm good. That's all I needed to know was just it >> I had a couple of questions on um it was and 4210. There was um it was on ethical conduct and anti-harassment and there's just a one it recommends that we use the language and so is that is that what we're voting on? It was like right in the the middle is the only change to the policy that and it said

121although that wasn't a they recommended that we continue to use that language. Well, we're voting on to advertise, but that's the way you've explained is what I interpret. Okay. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Anybody have any comments or questions on that? >> I think you're talking about the drafting note that's in the middle of it. >> Yes. >> Technical corrections were stat. >> Okay. >> They said it's not mandatory we create an procedure that they recommend. >> Okay. All right. We have a motion and second. All in favor signify by saying I. >> Motion carries unanimously. All right. We'll now move to our last new business item uh L5 which is just simply uh the board's position on documentation backup on positions and the recommendation at the workshop was for only director positions and above.

122So I'm open the floor for discussion. >> Could you repeat that? >> Yes sir. for um L5 the positions for backup information to be submitted with in other words what we had today we approved all those names and everything the only backup information pursuant to that would just be for director level positions and above nothing below >> I have a problem with that >> so that was what we teach you you wanted to think about it and and then come back for for us to make a decision. So, and I can't make the motion, but but I I think that's a a reasonable, you know, and that certainly takes a huge burden off the staff with these other positions, which which I thought, you know, then the instructional positions are all set guidelines, everything. I

123don't I don't think there's any problem with that or administration. Did we did we determine I just can't remember um what type of backup information I know we had limited it. >> Well, it' be the statutory requirement, the job description and salary schedule, the qualifications of the applicant and I don't think there was one more. Don's got the statute right there. But so it just be the basic information in in the first paragraph there. it uh minimum qualifications for personnel. Are are you is that what you're you're >> Well, we're talking about the backup information that would be submitted for the board to approve the position >> like if somebody was a first grade teacher or kindergarten teacher. No, no, they won't be considered. Just anybody that's in in uh the upper anybody above teachers,

124the job description, the resume, >> describe application, disposition provide for compens compensation, promotion, suspension, that type of thing. So then all that the backup information Mike we would we would get um as I understand it it would be um a copy of the job description the the qualifications of the applicant the salary schedule thought there's one other thing but but those were the and the yeah >> as far application yeah >> and it would be for the top three or would it be for all candidate or just the >> director level and above of >> that's all public record anyway. >> It is, but um the way the statute I think interposes that you know we have that information when we take a vote on it. So all right um chair will entertain a motion

125or discussion or questions. I would like to say that once again >> if we if we put something in statute like that then or or in our policy that'll tie the hands of the superintendent if he is in a a meeting in Seattle, Washington and find somebody that's the greatest thing since sliced bread to hire and bring here you and that sounds kind of weird but I mean you're just trying to box yourself in a corner where you can't have options to do good things. Like I've hired kids, young people out of college in churches at the church service and hired them and said, you know, hey, you're reporting schools, come by and do paperwork. It's I just don't know why you you feel that strongly about it. I mean, I've seen it before with

126boards in the past, but I just don't feel that that's my perspective. I just >> Mr. Hman, you want to address that with respect to the statute and you know the question he was saying that there in Seattle? Um they I mean that and I think you said that they can hire them with a contingency that this board approved. If they're the best thing since sliced bread, I can't imagine the board approve that. >> Well, even even if you send an administrator to bring back a a Tim Adams or a JT Stout like we've done in the past from Indiana. I I just >> it wouldn't it wouldn't apply to instructional or or the school side that the that so unless they're a director or above. Well, it's just more of the stuff you were

127fussing about earlier in the meeting or complaining about. I got you. >> Not fussing complaining. I was just pointing out my professional opinion, which is just mine. >> And I'm not I know. >> I just don't want to handcuff and put anybody in a corner where they can't make a decision. >> Individually, >> ma'am. No, we didn't. The board the attorney said we didn't need to do them, right? >> Oh, I thought you had to name them and then vote in one lump. Okay. >> Yep. All right. Any other questions or comments on or or the you know on this or discussion or a motion? >> Okay. >> And it's just >> we haven't had a motion. No. >> Okay. And and and the Mrs. White said at at one of our meetings prior to

128this that on the top three or whatever the top number to send that would not pose a a a problem. Right. It's just for the person that's being recommended for the position. >> Correct. >> Oh, just the one final recommendation. >> Okay. All right. That's even that's even >> the final recommendation, not applicants or anything else. Okay. And >> since this is new business, is this motion to set this on the agenda for the next meeting? What >> I think motion is needed here? Well, I'll remind you if if if we get into a a million-doll roll back from the state or something and the superintendent has to start rolling personnel into positions, he's liable to roll people that aren't don't hold whatever somebody's idea of a minimum competency is into positions to save money.

129And it's not uncaracteristic for that to happen. and and I wouldn't my my position is in that cir circumstance um again especially for those kind of reasons I think the board as a whole would have to understand that and and appropriately >> well I I just >> I don't want to tie >> what I see >> yeah what from what I'm what I'm observing it's looks to me like more of an effort to to try to tie hands it's just >> maybe I'm wrong I'm reading it wrong >> I just been through it a lot >> I'm sitting right beside I've been shot a bunch of times. I've been >> But my position is going by the law. I mean, that's what I'm trying to do. And if the law says we have an obligation

130to do something, I I want it set up to where nobody can come in and say otherwise. Um, that's my position. And I understand it may be a better business model in a lot of ways to let him or anybody else uh appoint people or or do whatever. But if the statute says otherwise, I don't see that we have a choice but to do. >> Well, let's say somebody has an axe to grind with the superintendent, a future board member, and they try to do something to create problems and they want to stop him from doing something like that. Then you your system shuts down and you're back in two with a different attorneys representing the superintendent, the board attorney representing the board or whoever on the board it is. And I've just >> Well,

131I think that's why we have five people. >> Yeah, there you go. I've been through it. Mr. Chair, can I make a comment to this? >> Yes, sir. You recognize >> I'm just going to say um I'm really I'm I'm very disappointed first of all that this even came up just because I feel a high degree of mistrust of the administration and at any time I've invited board members to come in. If you had a question about any hires, come in and see us. But for us, and we'll provide whatever we got to hire, whatever we got to provide. But right now, I just feel like, you know, there there's a degree of mistrust that our administration cannot make judgments on people that we can recommend to this board. I'm not saying we're not trying

132to abide by the statute. you can come in and we'll provide that documentation for you. But right now, it sounds to me like you're questioning or there's a question about whether or not we can make adequate judgments about people that work for this district. And I'm telling you what, I'm I'm personally offended that this is even coming up. And I invite I invite any board member to come in. I've got a question about a a certain hire, come on in. We'll lay it out for you. But just to have this out there for every single person just tells me that uh there's uh you're lacking the the trust and the professionalism of these people in this audience. So that's all I got to say. >> And I want the board to vote on whatever they

133want to vote on. And yeah, the statute says what the statute says, but this administration bustes their butt to provide the best people for for these jobs. And I feel like right now you're questioning that. So back to you, Mr. Chair. >> Yeah. Uh, so Mr. Superintendent, I'm highly offended too that the administration and I and I came in to see you and Miss Whitehurst with the board attorney not once but twice. We discussed it at the board meeting. What I'm saying in the three years I've been here almost three years. This is only my questioning um your recommendations only happened in two two occasions. The first one I couldn't say anything because I was under the impression we we didn't have any that that statute I didn't know was in existence. All I'm saying

134is and it's not for everybody for directors. A director is a position that's very high in the totem pole and that we may disagree and then the board may disagree on different positions who they interpret with reading the job description and the and the final applicant whether or not they're qualified or not. That's their individual opin opinion. That's not uh we're not I'm not saying that that the staff isn't doing their job or they're not making recommend you know the correct recommendations. If in three years I only had two questions then obviously you're doing something right. But what I'm saying is for those positions pursuant to the statute I think it behooves the board. Now again, we had to vote on they may just totally disagree and um you know, but that we review the

135the recommendation that you make on the appointment and we look at the job description and the the the the resumes or applications, um salary salary schedule, all the things that the statute outlines and we just, you know, vote to approve it or not approve it. now. And I can assure you, I will do like I did with this position that we brought up today. If I've got a problem, I'm going to come talk to you about it, which I did. >> I'm glad you did because you haven't been doing that. So, I'm glad you are and I I I welcome you any day. >> Like I said, there's only been one one other occasion and and and again, and once the person's hired, it's a moot point. I mean, uh today, you know, this you'll

136never hear anything about this again because the board, the majority of the board passed it and approved it. So, it's a it's a done deal, >> but I want the the board to vote on it. I just want to express my opinion that um >> you you would prefer us not having any any unless we ask for it individually. >> Hey, you're the one that brought it up. And I'm just saying if you want this and the board chooses to have all this and our people have to go through and provide all that, so be it. But I'm just telling you right now, the way we've been doing it, it's being communicated to me that we are not capable of hiring adequate people. And you can always come in and talk to us. We'll lay

137it all out for you. But to provide this for all everybody, directors and up, it tells me, it sends a strong message to me that if the board if the board votes on that, it sends a message to me that we do not know what the heck we're doing. So that's the last thing I got to say about it. >> All right. Go ahead. I >> I just want to be clear for myself. Uh I appreciate everything that our district staff does and they've been wonderful to me and when I ask for something, I get it and they've worked very nicely with me. Um most recently, Miss Whitehurst. Um my approach on this, and it may be the same or different than anyone else's, is simply um trying to do my job more clearly. And

138in, you know, more than likely every recommendation you you bring is likely going to get get passed is how I feel. But at least we have the ability to have the information to make a an actual decision that we are ordered to do through the legislature. That's how because I don't like rubber stamping anything. Um, and that doesn't have to do with mistrust of anyone. It's just if they're telling us we have to make a decision, we get a name. That's not a decision. And so I just would like a little I do agree with that having a little bit of information not to overload you but just on the one person that is selected >> we you know more than likely we look at it and we go yep sounds good. Um that's just

139how I'm approaching it. So I personally am not trying to say I I distrust anyone and I think it kind of spreads the responsibility around a little too. It's not just on the folks recommending or just on the superintendent. We then held accountable for our decisions then in passing it. >> Well, and one of the reasons I quit attending the dynamic Florida school board master board training is that board members normally don't follow what you're taught in there. How it is to go in and sit down and talk to a superintendent and and find out what's going on and ask the questions that need to be asked instead of, you know, this this level that goes on. And it's just it's just different. I I don't know. I It's not unreasonable to ask for that,

140but it's depends on what you're going to do with that information. If you got somebody wanting to cause problems, they're going to cause problems. And that's unfortunately 90 times out of a hundred, that's what my experience has been over the years. So, and not saying that's the case here, but I'm I can always ask district staff who this person is and what their qualifications are. that you know what we're talking about basically is four pieces of paper you know scanned and attached to the to the the board agenda and all it does is give the other board members the opportunity so to see what the board member that may had a question about it or disagreement you know um you know um we're going to disagree on things I think that's been obvious by you

141know by our votes today um but the fact of the matter is I'm not challenging what the true to how I mean I've I've said two positions we probably hired or rehired 2,000 people in the last three years. Two out of 3,000. I mean that's I don't even know what that is but it's not even a regable percentage. So and and these positions you know the directors and above are critical positions and I agree with what Miss Wagner said. You know, I get questions about all kind of stuff, including personnel and this in the whole process from constituents and people calling or texting or emailing me. You know, I want to have a good answer for them and say, "No, maybe I disagreed with the, you know, with them, but the board approved it." And

142so the board's the final say, and it's a done deal. So, you know, you go complain somewhere else. That's that's that's the end of it. I don't see it as a reflection on the staff or what the staff is do doing in human resources or with recruiting or placements or anything else. It's just forformational purposes. If it's too much of a burden or the board doesn't think we need it, then no need for a motion. >> Can can I just get a clarifying comment question? >> Yes, ma'am. You're recogn. >> Okay. So, I want to make it clear that this the director and above is not about making sure we're in compliance with statute. Um, because we've already had that conversation. The qualifications are approved through the job descriptions. The position is approved through personnel

143allocations. And then your final piece is the recommendation. getting backup information for directors and above. That's that's your call. Like that's but that I mean because it doesn't specify certain positions, you can't say that that's putting it in compliance with statute if you're not asking for that for every employee. So it's not about us following that statute. It's simply about giving you more information about specific positions because the only thing that I need to do to make sure we are fully in compliance with that statute from my understanding is to make sure there is a statement in our onboarding packet about contingency offer pending final approval of the board and they acknowledge it. And if I am wrong, I need clarification because my signature goes on this and I value my signature with the state

144with the state department because I want my retirement money. >> Could you clarify that, Mr. Holmes? >> Well, I So here's I don't know if it's clarification or not, but maybe there's a lot of discussion that people are taking more personally that it's intended. The statute imposes a burden on you to approve or reject a nomination from the superintendent. That's clear. >> I don't know how you approve or reject without information from which you can make an informed decision. You go in and sign a document to buy a car. They put it in front of you. You might trust a salesman. Do you not read the document? When the statute says the burden is on you to reject only upon pro only upon good cause, does that not imply that you know something about the

145applicant that's being put in front of you in order for you to decide whether you have good cause to reject? I don't look at it as a matter of I don't look at it personally since you asked me as a matter of not trusting anyone. Your opinion may differ from someone else's and and everybody may be acting in good faith. Uh so um from my perspective, when the statute says you're to make a decision on uh a nomination, if you're not going to have any information other than the fact that staff recommended the person, then you basically are a rubber stamp because you're not making any independent inquiry even so much as looking at a resume. You ask me, I'm telling you. So, from my opinion, if you're only going to say, "Well, Miss White

146says these are the people, we're going to say that we're fulfilling our obligation by saying yes, you could do that." If if that's like I said, I never tell you what you can't do. I just don't know how you make an informed decision without even basic information about the person. >> So, Mr. Attorney, and that's what I'm asking is differentiate between >> how do you differentiate above or everybody >> because the statute doesn't say that. I think that this the my understanding was that the workshop the intent of the board was to try to minimize the amount of work that was put on staff and essentially limit that inquiry to those in the positions where there might be the greatest potential for a difference of opinion as to qualifications or or or or I any

147competence to hold the position. And this is me just making filling in blanks from the way I understood things. But you interview teachers every day. They they have their teaching certificate. They don't have a criminal record. They meet the the threshold. I don't know that it's fair to say that you in order that the board either has to say you do that for every teacher or you can't do it for the director. I don't read it that way. You may >> right. And that >> but but that's but my point was that I think the board in in the in the uh workshop was saying look we aren't going to try to go behind every hire you make. We don't need to look at principles. We don't need to look at necessarily teachers. But when

148you get to a certain level, we'd like to be able to see the qualifications, the job description and the resume so that we can make an informed decision. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. and and I I totally agree with that and that is what we discussed at the workshop and I said I will give you whatever that you need but I'm I just don't want it saying that we're doing that to be in compliance with a statute that doesn't specify a certain level. It's it's the board wishes so that you can have that information. But I truly believe and I will I mean and I am not an attorney but I truly believe what we are doing is in compliance with statute because you've already approved those other things other than that having that contingency

149statement in writing with it within that employee signature on it acknowledging that they understand that I am fine giving y'all additional information that's that's not >> so and I and I think in our conversation in in private I just explained from an attorney's perspective let's say you you have a negligent hire. Superintendent makes a recommendation, board approves it, and then let's say that it's it's a big enough deal so that you get into litigation and they interview a board member and say, "Miss Gillyard, you you approve this recommendation. You approve the nomination of the superintendent." Yes. And what did you rely upon in doing that? Well, Miss Whitehurst recommended it. I'm not so sure that that's going to be compliance with the statute, but maybe it'll never happen. I understand people keep saying, "Well, we've

150never done it that way. We can't hardly we can't hardly work that way." And my my answer is, you know, I for a lot of years, I've not said what I thought, which law was was a good law and which law was a bad law, or whether I thought I could write a better law. I just say, "Look, this is the law that somebody's given me and the legislaturator's been in they haven't changed it for a long time." So that's that's my read on it is I don't know how you make an informed >> decision without some information other than uh if it's just going to say the statute could say >> you know board shall adopt the recommendation of the super superintendent they it could say that and then there'd be no discussion right

151now. >> Superintendent makes a recommendation the board shall trust the superintendent's recommendation and and employ the whoever's nominated. They could say that and then you got no responsibility. he makes a recommendation, you adopt it. But that's not what it says. >> And I'm not disagreeing with that at all. And I I don't know if what I'm trying to say is making sense or not. >> I'm trying to say, if I may, um >> Yes, please. You don't want us going, "Oh, we're doing this to be in compliance, but we're only going to do it for these people." >> Thank you. That that is that is what I'm trying to say. >> I got you. Uh I think our our for me, I can only talk to me. I I think my position on that through

152our discussions was that like he said with teachers, there are very clear-cut qualifications. You have to have a teaching certificate. Um so if someone is now you've got good teachers and bad teachers um in those positions I just I I feel that they're so defined that you know the the recommendation is probably >> but we have positions that are different than teach I mean we have other positions that maybe not so defined. I mean, that's the thing is like if you start looking at every single position we have and trying to make that decision and I'm fine with it being a like I like I've said at the workshop, we will do my department will do what the board requests for us to do and you make and you make a decision on that. I

153just I just want to make sure that we all understand that we can't if if we're trying to be in compliance with a statute, you can't pick and choose which employees you're going to do that with. And if you feel like >> we do it with all employees, >> I'm not recommending that. That's what I'm saying. >> No employees. >> Here. No, I'm what I'm saying is I don't want it to say that it's tied that that you're doing this >> to so that we're right, >> but it's saying that we're in compliance that you're doing it so that we're in compliance with the statute. >> What board member wouldn't go into human resources and ask what's going on? You know, I just don't >> No, I I I really don't have anything more to

154say. Hey, I mean from my perspective I if I don't understand why it doesn't seem rational to draw a line at some level and say that there based upon the practicalities of the numbers of people hired the relatively objective criteria for hiring like a teacher or janitor whatever that the level of scrutiny from the board can be different. I mean, courts exercise discretion every day. And we're not talking about a private employer. We're talking about a school district that has to follow a statute. So, from my standpoint, um, you know, if if you again, if you're comfortable in in saying that you're fulfilling your obligation by simply by simply trusting the recommendation of of the superintendent, then you can say that. But but you might have to and maybe you'll never have to answer a

155question from somebody like me asking you how you could say that without knowing anything about the person who was recommended. >> But but but statute says that you're the one that's supposed to be the final the final the final vote on whether a hire is made and it's it's pretty clear that that it's not just a preuncter vote. So I'll I'll leave it at that and and like u like you said I don't think it's I don't see it as a personal matter but I know some do. I don't see it either matter of trust or personal or distrust. I just and and I understand that I don't understand how kind of the practices have gone where they have gone. I mean, I've not been a long-term board attorney. Um, and as I told you

156earlier, I there was a time when I had talked to an earlier board member and said that basically y'all don't have any say so in administrative matter. You just basically are rubber stamp. I kind of took that at face value until I started reading statutes and said, "Well, that's not what this says." says, you know, I don't I don't get the fact that somebody explain to me why this doesn't mean what it says. And I'm happy for somebody to do that. Just tell me this doesn't mean what it says and and and then I'm good. But until then, it says you make a decision. And if you're willing to make a decision without any information about the person that you're deciding uh upon, then that's that's that's for you. And on the other hand, if

157you think there's a different level of scrutiny that's that a principal or a teacher might deserve compared to a director of finance, let's just say, or whatever, then I think that's your discretion to make too. And that's that's really all that's my opinion. >> Well, and I understood that at the last board meeting, I think Miss White stated that it been board policy that the board doesn't get any backup information unless they request it. And so, we went through this whole process and, you know, statute trumps board policy. Um and so we we discussed and said, "Well, yeah, there are pe there's a whole group of people that we we don't need to really review their backup information, just have a list of approved like we did today." Um but, you know, my recommendation was

158and not to meet the statute, but so every board member has the same information if in fact they need to and we have full transparency. And so if you get questions, well why why did they why did so and so do this higher make this higher that you've got the answers and the board has approved it. So, um, so I'm saying that the board just and I don't know if it's policy or not, but we just set, you know, a a level, a limit as to what we want and then if a position other than lower than the director comes up, you have a question about it as the superintendent says, you can go in and talk to the to them and and, you know, see if you can get your questions answered or you

159still disagree with it, then you can pull it from the the list that's like we had today. So that that's all I'm saying. And listen, I'm not I'm not trying to say anybody personally anything. I'm just trying to figure out what's the best way for us to do our job. And I think that the attorney is right that there is a different level of scrutiny for higher positions than there is for a janitor. Well, I can't believe a board member wouldn't know anything about who's who they're approving for a position if they hadn't called or gone in and asked. I just can't fathom that. But I mean that's me. And then the next thing I've got once again if we get in a bad economic time, which hopefully we won't, but he has to start

160rolling people from the district level to principal ships or assistant principal ships to cover school and principles into guidance positions like we've done in past times. What's the board going to do? You going to how you going to stop him and keep him from doing it and cost us a million, $2 million? depends on how much money he's got. I >> there's there's just >> I think it'd be >> there's a lot >> there's just a lot more to this than than meets the eye. And >> I don't I disagree. I don't >> And and we you can disagree all you want because I don't know what you did at the Department of Agriculture. Y'all probably had a a resume that long, but we have job descriptions that are approved. And if you send somebody

161to hire someone, they they don't necessarily have had to have had 20 years experience in a position to go offer the job to someone if they meet qualifications. And I'm I'm just I've had about all of this. I can I can take >> Last thing I'll say is that um this job description was written and approved in 2014. Um you know, and we and we approved today a whole list of job descriptions that have been rewritten and updated. um this wasn't one of them. Uh I did provide that um you know and that could have come to the board for approval and we could have you know bypassed all this had had that been put on the board agenda and we could have voted on it. And again the vote probably would have been the

162same thing as it was today. But at least we'd have had that opportunity and you would have had that information for you to review to decide whether what your position was on it personally as as a board member. So I think Mr. Buckles is right. We will um I'll take a motion or we can just not take any action on this if that's whatever the board wants. >> I just make statements. So if I see someone on um personnel matters that is a director level and I'm I'm okay with that part of it. Um, if I if I do my due diligence and go to Miss Whitehurst >> and and I've looked up the job description prior to and I um, you know, I'm not really sure of the qualifications that the person has, >>

163but if I go to her and I say, "Does this person meet these qualifications?" or I talk to her on the phone and I say this person meets then I don't have to have a written thing. I can just go and talk to her. Is that not >> or she could give you that information when you went and talked to her. She could give you the you know the the resume or application that that was submitted by the individual and then you can review that based you know on the job description. I mean it's just that simple you know. So that's the way we've been doing it that you if you had a question you went and talked to to her. Correct or no? >> I don't I'm I'm >> You had a question about

164the job. >> This is only Okay. >> The first one I've ever had. >> I could call her or Thomas or Rick or whoever and ask him a question. >> Right. Right. I think point is more if it makes it very clear if they provide it to us uh across the board on these positions. because it makes it very clear that the board has gotten it. So, you can get it and choose not to read it. >> Okay? >> But, you know, if we if we don't have it given to us, then there's, you know, we can't pull each other in and say, "Well, did you actually go talk to somebody about it or not?" And it would at least be an absolute we've had the information to make a good >> Okay, I'll go

165there. Yeah. >> All right. Um, we need to bring this to a close. So, I don't hear a motion. >> I'll make a motion. I don't know how to specify it, but a a motion uh to approve that for director positions and above that we receive the basic information such as the job description, qualifications, >> salaries, >> salary and application. >> Now, what's above a director, >> executive director, >> executive Okay. All right. All right. >> All right. I have a motion. Is there a second? Okay, >> I'll second for discussion. >> All right, I'll have a second discussion. >> And I agree with Miss Wagner. It does give us a little bit if we had it, you know, that we it we could choose to ignore it, but at least it was provided. Um

166I still believe I could to go and speak in person. So um so you still have that option. So >> Right. Any other questions or discussion? Miss Miss Piggins, are you >> Well, I'm still thinking. Okay. >> Miss Gard, >> I'm I'm I'm trying to to think uh in regards to contingency uh that came up uh in regards to the what it uh the policy and what it said uh we shall do. But when when the person is offered the position, Mrs. Whitehurst already stated that they understand that this is a contingency based on what is done at the me at the board meeting. >> As part of the onboarding, >> right? Okay. All right. >> All right. Have a motion in a second. All in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I.

167>> I. >> All right. Motion carries. I didn't 3 to two or four to one. I could Miss Piggins, how' you vote? >> She said I >> Okay, motion carries four to one. All right, we will now move to reports. Uh we will have Mr. Weaver make our school safety report for the fourth quarter. You're recognized. >> Thank you, sir. >> I actually have uh two very quick reports to share with you. Um both are related to uh DOE's office of safe schools um compliance inspections. The first one being for the fourth quarter. Um during the fourth quarter of this of this year, we had three of our schools which is equivalent to about 20% of our schools overall that were inspected. Um two of those schools which represent about 66% had absolutely no deficiencies

168whatsoever. The one school did have as we discussed in executive did had a documentation issue which was corrected. And then the uh second report is basically the running total for the entirety of the of the year for these uh same inspections. DOE over the course of the school year inspected 10 of our schools which represent about 66% of our schools. Um, out of those 10, eight had absolutely zero deficiencies, which represents about 80%. So, that's all I have unless you have questions. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> All right. Um, we will now move to uh reports by board members. Um, I'll start with you, Miss Wagner. >> Sure. Um, hey, fast. I again I wanted to say I'm really happy we are we have the AI policy coming out. Um something in

169law that always annoys me is the laws take years and years and years to catch up with technology and I'm glad to see we're staying on top of that. Um, you know, and and while I realize that we have some disagreements on this, I I still am happy that this board overall is able to talk this stuff out, come to conclusion and and move forward. So, just wanted to say that on a positive note and that's all I'm going to say to that. >> All right, Miss M. Miss Gillard, >> real quick, just just want to mention the article. We saw Mrs. Huff is already gone regarding uh Mrs. Joyce Oliver and the friend she is to public education most especially to Putnham County and and I just love it. Uh did get an opportunity

170to be a part of the welcome back breakfast at Brown and Pierce. The enthusiasm and the excitement uh shown uh by the teachers and the staff there just is really encouragement. Um also to the Ron Dennis Press Box being pastor. Thank you for that. And tonight, well, they've already begun the Florida night out pals uh athletic association over here at the riverfront where they kind of supposed to turn off all technology and kind of have fun things going. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mr. Buckles. >> Did you throw darts at my picture at Brian and Pierce? >> No, sir. I just smiled and said there's Papa Bear. >> Um >> that's all. You know, I just hey, I it is what it is. I'm just I've done this before and it's not my first

171rodeo and I don't have all the answers, but I just know that when the chips are down, it's it's hard to work sometimes. And uh but I was real pleased on the Ron Dennis thing. I I I just the naming of the press box certainly doesn't do justice. about Miss Joyce Oliver. People will never know how many students her husband FV sent to college because he wouldn't let you tell who was selected. He wouldn't let you tell them that he gave the money for years. So with that, I'll pass it on because it's >> um first I'd just like to say I do have complete trust in our administration. Um, normally, uh, you know, this day, yesterday, the start of school is like really, um, great. This meeting hasn't been super great, but, um, I,

172uh, I would just like to say welcome back to all of our teachers and our staff. And I know at the beginning of the year, it's uh, you get to, it's one job that you get to just completely turn the page and start like over. And that's the great thing about teaching. You just come in all um ready uh and excited. Um and the children do too. And um I'm looking forward to the fall sports and everything getting started. I love football season. I love to hear the band. I love to watch the cheerleaders and I really love to watch the players. So >> thank you. I just have one one issue. Uh Mr. Hanky sent me an email. all of us an email after the the the budget workshop and and he provided an

173excellent explanation and presentation there kind of off the cuff, but he has offered to go into a more detailed um update that he's like he's done in the past if if the board's interested. I I certainly would love to hear that because I I think he brings some real valuable information about what what's happening and how hard they're all working to help us move forward, you know, uh in the grading system, which I don't think the the state grading system is fair. Uh but but at any rate, I I would like if the other board members would like to do that, I think we could. Jon, we need to do that in a workshop or or Okay. In a workshop. So, um, there's a consensus of the board that in, you know, in the next

174couple months, we'll, uh, have Mr. make a presentation in a a board workshop. We can do it right before board meeting. >> Yes, sir. >> Is that that okay? >> All right. Yes, sir. >> I just have one comment, a little off subject, but to bring you up to date, uh, I was asked to visit the, uh, sitting county judge in Putnham County, who's also handling all of your truency court last week. She wanted to advise me that the judges have been discussing a recent bill of the legislature. It's a 100 pages long and it basically upends truency court as we have known it in the past. Um right now apparently there is not a model to follow. not another district or another county has basically put something in place that uh she's aware of

175that we can just immediately look to to to go forward with truency court. But there's going to be some need for some changes and uh those of you who are familiar with truency court know or familiar with interface where students are sent when they have been determined basically by the court to be truent and been findings by the court made that there's a need for some intervention. Well, she will no longer be able to send a student to interface unless she first makes a finding that the parents are in contempt, which is a big deal. It's a big it's a much more much more it's much heavier standard than what she's had to make in the past. And if she does send anybody to interface, it's for only 10 days. So, it doesn't give them

176a 30-day window for some sort of behavioral modification. It's a 10day. In addition, they're requiring that truency court be held every 45 days, not less than 45 days, whereas now it's being held every quarter. She says basically her schedule won't accommodate that. And so there's going to be a need for some significant change. She mentioned whether the asked about whether the board would be willing to hold truency court. I told her I doubted it, >> but it's not for me to say. >> So uh I'll be getting with uh and by that I didn't mean to say that you weren't willing to accept the responsibility. It's just that that's a whole whole different ballgame that >> tech technically they just about do in in expulsion committees about the same type thing. So is it Janusa?

177Is that who it is? Okay. All right. >> So I'm going to be trying to get with some other districts and find out what they're doing with truency court and also get with your staff to find out what's doable here and then get back with her and um see if we can remake the wheel, I guess. Okay, Mr. Superintendent >> 16. >> Yeah. >> Um visit we our staff visited all the um faculty meetings for all the schools. Teachers came back yesterday and u I think it's very positive. Um and actually they're talking about school grades and they're talking about they're really setting goals or the teachers and all that. So, you know, I think everybody's hitting the ground running and uh very very upbeat about doing even better this year. So, that's all the

178I have. >> Any other business come before the board? All right, we'll stand a journ.