Fiscal Accountability and Government Relations Committee - Regular Meeting

Good morning. Welcome to the Fiscal Accountability and Government Relations Committee meeting for Wednesday, March 4th, 2026. I'm now calling to order the meeting. If we can all please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance led by our Board Chair, Ms. Maritere Rojas. United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. We can remain standing for one minute for a moment of silence. Thank you all very much. Before we get started, I'd like to state the committee membership. You have myself, Roberto Alonso as the chair. We have Mr. Danny Espino as the vice chair, Ms. Luisa Santos as a member, Mr. Joseph Geller as a member, and Dr. Dorothy Bendos-Mendigo as an alternate member. Our first order of business is to approve the minutes of the Wednesday, February 4th, 2026 Fiscal Accountability and Government Relations Committee meeting. Move it.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Okay. We now move over to our E items. The next order of business is to move the E items to the floor. Can I get a motion?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Our first item is E1. Mr. Steiger. E1 is the monthly financial report for the period ending January 2026.

Do we have any questions or comments? E142.

E142 is a request approval of a supplemental award on a bid for security camera video surveillance systems.

Thank you.

Any questions or comments?

E143? E143 is award of an ITB for food service equipment and kitchenware supplies. And Mr. Chair, I'll just say that we're going to have some slight revisions to this item because there's a couple of small changes that need to happen to the subject and throughout just some small grammatical things that need to be taken care of. So you'll see a revision, but it's nothing substantive. Okay, thank you very much.

We now go to E201.

E201 is the monthly acceptance of grants and donations. We just have one this month.

Yes.

Any questions or comments? Okay. Nope. Okay, so now that we've heard all E items and they've been discussed, we'll now take a motion to recommend the E items to our board meeting of March 11th, 2026. Move it.

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Okay, excellent. The next order of business is to move our G items to the floor. May I get a motion to move our G items to the floor? Move it. Second. All in favor? Aye. All right, G1, Mr. Harvey.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. G1 presents for the board's consideration amendments to policy 6320, purchasing. THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE A FOLLOW-UP TO TWO AGENDA ITEMS FROM THE NOVEMBER 2025 MEETING. THE FIRST ITEM IS H3, THE REVIEW OF AMENDMENT TO BOARD POLICY TO ENSURE PROPER PROCUREMENT AND OVERSIGHT OF INCOME GENERATING CONTRACTS THAT WAS INTRODUCED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE BOARD. THE SPONSOR OF THAT ITEM WAS BOARD MEMBER THE CHAIR, BOARD MEMBER ALONSO, AND NOVEMBER STRENGTHENING ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY IN THE USE OF DISTRICT FUNDS. THESE ARE FOR EXCEPTIONAL PURCHASES, PROVIDING ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS SURROUNDING THOSE EXCEPTIONAL PURCHASES, AND THAT WAS INTRODUCED AND SPONSORED BY BOARD MEMBER GALLEN AND PASSED BY THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY. AND IF YOU'D LIKE, I CAN GO THROUGH EACH ITEM, OR YOU CAN

any yes you're recognized uh board chair rojas thank you mr chair uh first i want to thank um our general counsel as always he and his team do a great job and i just have just a couple of clarifying questions the amount of the 50 000 um that is being struck out i i know that tier three um from what i read is for purchases that are less than fifty thousand but I'm not sure it's clear so I would have to look at the revised paragraph if I don't know what tier three is and then I'm gonna have to go through the entire policy to find the answer do you think that that that's something that could be a little bit clearer in that arena through the chair

Yes, through the chair.

The Tier 3 threshold is $50,000.

Right. Correct? Yes. Yes. Go ahead, sir.

There was a thought that let's say the legislature were to change the Tier 3 threshold, then we wouldn't have to modify it in the policy. And if you'd like, we could specifically reference it there.

We don't, through the chair, we don't have to. I just needed more of an explanation. I just want to make sure that when people read it, that they can find it right away. They don't have to go through the entire policy to find it. Just food for thought. Not necessarily do you have to do it, just a suggestion. Okay. And on page 7 of 33, on that one, we had section A1. That's the one that states that emergency purchases request form B and estimated expenditures less than tier 3 purchasing threshold requires all signatures that are on the form. How many signatures are required for to approve and sign because that could delay the process quite some time. I know that the form wasn't in there, but if you could respond to me as to how many people have to go through that process through the chair.

Through the chair, I'd have to pull up the form. Do you have the answer? Yeah. I'm sorry.

Okay, thank you.

If you don't mind.

Through the chair, yeah, Board Chair Rojas. For emergency purchases under $50,000, it's the owner, the department or whoever's asking for the emergency purchase, there's two internal signatures from procurement, and then that just automatically is processed and approved. For purchases over $50,000, those same signatures, and then the superintendent and or his designee.

So just the superintendent and or his designee?

Correct. Okay. So the department, procurement, the superintendent.

Because we're talking about how to expedite everything so that we're not delaying. Because sometimes by the time signatures get to me, sometimes it's taken quite some time to get there. So to be more efficient, I want to make sure that this is something that moves very quickly. EXPEDITIOUSLY.

AND JUST THROUGH THE CHAIR AND BOARD CHAIR ROJAS, IT'S AN ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE, AND SO WE MOVE THOSE PRETTY QUICKLY.

WELL, YOU JUST STARTED THAT PROCESS THROUGH THE CHAIR.

WE'VE BEEN DOING ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE IN PROCUREMENT SINCE.

OH, YOU'RE SAYING IN PROCUREMENT. YEAH, BUT WE CONTINUE TO ROUTE IT.

YEAH, WE CONTINUE TO ROUTE IT. THESE ARE ELECTRONIC.

THANK YOU.

NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU.

All right. That's all that I have, Mr. Chair. And again, thank you, Mr. General Counsel, for clarifying that.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair, for the question. And thank you so much to staff. And thank you for answering the question that I was going to follow up with, which was on electronic signatures, because that does delay the process and it also creates unneeded work through that. So thank you. Any other further questions on G1 from the board? No. And once again, thank you, Mr. Harvey, for following through on this. I think it's very important, and as always, your staff and yourself do an incredible job in following through with the board's initiatives, and it's greatly appreciated always. Great. That now concludes. Yes.

So sorry, Mr. Chair. I was not here, and I did have a quick question on E201. Okay.

We can go back to E201 if it's just a question. We had already voted on it, so if it's just for clarification purposes.

Thank you. It is. I know this is where a pass-through entity for the CSP grant for charter schools from the Florida DOE, this entity, when I look them up, I know this grant is meant to help schools start up, but they seem to have been in operations. So I wanted to just get clarity from our team if we know how long the Biscayne Ridge High School has been operating and how or why they might have qualified for this grant through the chairman.

So yeah, Mr. Chair, Ms. Santos, I know Ms. Pauline's not here, but she sent me the information.

Oh, she is here.

Good morning, Board, through the Chair. The CSP grant is a competitive grant, and this particular CSP grant is for a startup. Bridge Prep. Biscayne Ridge has been in operation for one year. This is their first year. Those grants usually span over three years, so it's before you get open all the way until like two to three years later. During your first opening so they applied for it the competitive through a competitive federal process and they were awarded the grant Thank you so much and through the chair.

I think it was clarified for me in my follow-up that this same legal entity operates other Similar sort of credit recovery focused schools. I know some down in my area more like Kendall greens and and they've got Green Springs and North Park High and North Gardens, but they only have enrollment of 151 students. I can do a more thorough follow up. I just wanna understand how our high school students are interacting with these entities that are more credit recovery focused. And when they go there, do they end up coming back and enrolling with us? Are they mostly graduating from these entities if they were a student with us before? And it is interesting that 151 out of 500 seats are filled and now you get a pretty decently sized grant. to grow seats where maybe none are needed. I'm just curious, and I know it's not our process, right? It's not our grant, obviously. But I would like to just understand this type of entity further, and I can do that individually after. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Board Member Santos. Do we have any further questions on the G items? If we don't, we've now discussed all the G items. Can we take a motion to recommend the G item to our meeting March 11th? All those in favor?

Aye.

Okay, the next order of business to move our H items to the floor. May I get a motion to move our H items to the floor? Move it. Second. All in favor? Aye. Okay, our first item is H7, presented by Board Chair, Ms. Marietta de Rojas.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. And this agenda item is asking the board to formally consider endorsing the unanimous vote which was taken by Miami-Dade County Commission urging the President of the United States to suspend Cuba-related federal licenses and general authorizations pending the completion of full federal audits. Several municipalities within Miami-Dade County have taken very similar positions demonstrating that this type of intergovernmental endorsement is consistent with actions already supported by the local level. The proposed endorsement would not create or direct foreign policy. Rather, it would align the board with a request for federal review and compliance measures advanced unanimously by our county's governing body. Given Miami-Dade's unique community composition and a direct impact that federal Cuba policy may have on many of our students, our families, and our employees, this item provides the board with an opportunity to formally acknowledge and support a call for action. As millions of Cubans continue to pray day in and day out, and wish for a free and democratic nation. The action would be advisory in nature and consistent with prior instances in which the board has expressed positions on matters affecting the broader community we serve. This is the item, Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair, for your item. Do we have any questions or comments from the board? Seeing none, do we have any co-sponsors on the item? All those in favor? Okay, can we now make a motion as the item has been co-sponsored now and recommended to the board meeting of March 11, 2026? All in favor? Okay. Our next item is H8, and that is my item. It is an item on the feasibility analysis of a school-based leadership incentive framework tied to student recruitment and retention. I first want to acknowledge the discussion that we just had during our budget meeting during our first budget meeting and really acknowledging the financial pressures we're facing due to enrollment patterns that continue to be shifting in our district. I also want to thank our school leaders and our district staff for the work that they're doing every day to support our students and our schools. We know it's very difficult work at many times, but work that is really needed and appreciated by all those in our community. The intent behind this item that I'm presenting today is to ask the administration to evaluate whether there may be ways to strengthen student recruitment and retention across our district, as we know that that has an impact and a direct impact on the revenue our district receives through the Florida Education Finance Program. Over the past several years, we've seen as a district the demographic shifts and the expanding of school choice options that have created new challenges that affect staffing allocations, facility utilization, and long-term planning. When we talk about rightsizing the district, it's also important that we remember that rightsizing is not just about reductions. It's also about stability and ensuring that our schools remain strong, competitive, and responsive to the needs of our families. By strengthening enrollment, it's one of the ways in which we can support the stability and maximize the investments that we make into each one of the schools in our communities. I also want to recognize the work that our principals already do together with their school leadership team In doing what is needed around recruitment and retention, I see them when we have our movie nights in my community, when we have different events in town halls where principals are coming out. They're talking to families. They're explaining about the programs and investing of their time, which we know is part of their responsibility, right, as principals to pay there. and they play a critical role in promoting those schools. They highlight their programs, they engage with families and their communities, and even with elected officials to make sure that parents are aware and the community aware is of the programs that they have. This item in no way is intended to replace that responsibility, but rather to explore whether there may be ways for the district to better support and reinforce those efforts. Equally important, this item does not establish a new program or create an expense today. This is simply a feasibility study, and it simply asks the superintendent to conduct an analysis so that the board can better understand what options may exist, what measurable indicators could be considered, and what the potential fiscal implications might be before any future policy discussion would occur by this board. So this is strictly a feasibility to see if it's something that could be done and what those implications would be. Specifically, they actually requested the superintendent review our current compensation structure as well for our school-based administrators, analyzing the enrollment trends across all of our schools, and evaluate potential measurable indicators tied to recruitment and retention, and report back to the board with those findings. Ultimately, this board item, in my opinion, is to strengthen enrollment and to help protect those programs that our students rely on and their families, and support the long-term stability of the schools. With that, I present this to the board and am open to any questions and look forward to having the support of this board as we look into this feasibility and exploring ways in which we can attract more students into our schools. Any questions or comments from the board? Board Member Espino, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr.

Chair. Of course, I welcome any conversation that drives a conversation about recruitment and retention and so I appreciate you thinking about it. I appreciate you framing the issues. I think we've all taken terms in a myriad of conversations trying to talk about these things from marketing to school-based changes. Respectfully, I do have some concerns, and my concerns are really on the principles, right? And let me explain why. We push strategy on how to market our schools, how to position our schools. Like I said, I'm merging a couple schools there and resulting in a new thing, and that principal is running with that thing. But that came as a result of an administration decision and a policy decision on my part. The principal didn't do that because the principal doesn't have the autonomy. And then sort of relatedly, our principals routinely don't have autonomy to make the kinds of business decisions that the manager of a franchise of any business would be able to do in the face of reduction in numbers. And speaking of, and in light of the conversation we had this morning, some of these reduction in numbers are beyond anyone's control. I mean, so if you, we like to take the good and look at things a certain way, but yes, our numbers are down mostly because of the dramatic reduction of immigration for unborn children. they went dramatically up as a result of an influx of foreign-born kids. But there's still a trend. If you take those numbers out, minus COVID, there was still a trend that exists that wasn't the responsibility of our principals. It was the responsibility of prior administrations, prior boards, and this board. So while we support feasibility analyses all the time, I'm just concerned that now putting this added pressure of saying principals... you have to do a better job of recruiting with factors that are simply beyond your control, might give them, like the movie John Wick, an impossible task to perform, and the only way to perform it is to do things outside the bounds of policy and procedure that they're allowed to do because we haven't given them that strategy and the administration hasn't authorized it. So if you can help me figure out how to reconcile that, I'd love to support it, but I don't know how to jive those two things, lack of direction or lack of ability to execute innovative direction with the job that we've got to do and the current job that they've got.

Absolutely. And you make a great point. And it's something that I actually spoke with the superintendent and with staff when I was putting together this board. I'm trying to really understand, right, how does our compensation structure work for our principals? In no way is this going to have a negative implication is what I'm trying to foresee here. And it's never to penalize a principal for a loss in enrollment because, as you said, it's something they can't control. If there is a shift in demographics or influx of students, if there is a closing of a school, those are areas in which they don't have it. Now, we have in years before in looking at some of the structures of salaries for administrators, have had different ways in which stipends or school-based sort of compensations have been issued to principals in some of the analysis I've done. So what this was going to really do is explore could there be something around enrollment and more from a positive standpoint, Board Member Spino, of if we're growing enrollment, those principles that are really going above and beyond, going to these events, which all of our principles do, right? But really as a way to incentivize all that extra work that is going into it was really where it was at. But to your point, a lot of those things are sometimes out of our control. It's out of control even for our teachers. We know that based on school grades, our teachers are incentivized by the state, and they receive stipends and bonuses for those grades. and for the learning gains. But unfortunately sometimes they can't even control that themselves, right? So there's always going to be that little bit of imbalance that we won't be able to control the entire outcome of it. And that's why really I wanted to first start this just as a conversation, as a feasibility, and allow administration that really goes into the compensation packages of each of those principles to see if there was a space that we could have some sort of stipend or a change or an adjustment there for that growth in enrollment and more of incentive program for our principals. But I completely agree with you that a lot of the times those are things that are out of the control of a principal. And I know that we have some principals here on the board, so I'd love to get feedback from our principals that are here and what some of their thoughts may be as well. So thank you. Yes, you're recognized, Dr. Gallin.

Yeah, just quick protocol. Who's chairing this item? Normally when you're the chair, if it's your item, you pass the gavel to somebody else. Who's the vice chair?

You made a great point. So the vice chair is a board member of SPINO. So board member of SPINO, you're now chairing, actually.

You're the chair. I'm talking to the maker of the item, who's the chair, but I like to follow protocol. So board member of SPINO, may I?

You're recognized.

Thank you. Through the chair, I appreciate the effort to continue the conversation relative to addressing recruitment and retention and enrollment, but I do share the sentiment of Board Member Ospino, and not just because he sits next to me, but he made a very, very powerful point, and I can illuminate that through experience. You asked for those of us who have been principals, and it's no secret I've been a principal, our Chair's been a principal, Dr. Bindros-Mendingal has been a principal, and that was a different time and landscape. But I want to just clarify something. Although it may not be intended to be a penalty, the denial of an opportunity for enhanced compensation is a penalty. If I'm denied the opportunity for that additional compensation through no fault of my own, through things that I have no control over, then in fact you're going to create a tale of two cities and you're going to create some unnecessary and unintended disparities. Through the chair, with respect to a stipend for those things that if you look at the 10 frames of instructional leadership, and I'll just do a shameless plug, my dissertation was on the principalship, instructional leadership. It was 10 frames proffered by Philip Hallinger out of Vanderbilt. in which he looked at things that principals should do along 10 particular frames. And community engagement and things of that nature were a part of it. So I'm always reluctant to want to incentivize something for what they should be doing. because it's part of the job. Things that clearly the state in its noble wisdom has provided an opportunity for schools that perform at certain levels to get school recognition money. So they do recognize that. But as it relates to things outside of their control and things that in my estimation they should be doing, I would be not as inclined to want to offer additional compensation for that. Because again, it's going to, without intention, it's going to create those disparities. And I'll give you that example. Through the chair, I think I was a pretty good principal. You may say I heard something different. But I got receipts and I got records and books, but I have a record of what it was when I was a principal and some of the toughest schools. When I was principal at Holmes Elementary School, in elementary school, vice chair, I had 1,180 students. 1,180 students at that school. When I was principal at Northwestern High School for seven years, I had 3,200 kids. I'm not gonna ask Dr. Lewis what the enrollment is in both of those schools, but I'm almost suggesting that it's less than half, and in some cases, it's probably a third. That is not to suggest that my ability to recruit, to engage that community was much more effective as the current principals at the schools. But the dynamics, to Board Member Espino's point, that they face have been out of their control. When I was principal at Northwestern, I had the Scott housing projects. That was taken down. I have Liberty Square housing projects. That was taken down. We had the village. That was taken down. We had Lincoln Fields. That was taken down. And I'm talking about public housing. So you imagine four major public housing units that no longer exist or through rebuilding, gentrification, whatever you want to call it, give an example at. At Scott Projects, it was called Hope Six, it was a project and a promise, a broken promise, that the percentage of families that are moved out will be allowed to come in. So let's just say the numbers were 2,000 families moved out and 500 were allowed to come back because they placed certain restrictions and guidelines and even the capacity to receive the 2,000 families was no longer there. That's out of the control of those principles. And so when you start to get into exploring some of these dynamics, as Board Member Espino mentioned, that are outside of the control of the principal, then you create inequity. Again, I thought I was a good principal, and these principals may very well feel like they're good principals too, but based on my enrollment at the time and their enrollment at the time, those dynamics they had no control over. Secondly, as I mentioned before, some of the dynamics of community engagement and attending events, and I even talked about board members recently. I said that at the last meeting, didn't I say? I said I went down the line. Certain things we do outside of these meetings, and for the record, committee meetings are not even required by law. We don't have to come to committee meetings. We don't have to come to workshops. We have to go to board meetings to approve certain things that are required pursuant to law. But we do town halls. We do community events. We do science fairs. We do Hispanic heritage, Black History Month programs, because we extend ourselves far beyond what this job requires for and definitely what this compensation provides for. So that's my reticence over this. And my third point, and I promise you I'll be quiet, Board Member Spino, I know our staff, and maybe I want to ask the staff to some extent, they have been actively engaged. I know our chair has talked about recruitment and enrollment over the past couple of years now. I know I see Ms. Pauline there who is headed up a number of initiatives around enrollment and recruitment at the district level. And I don't know to what extent this will be a bifurcation of that effort or are all of these efforts in alignment. So through the chair, maybe the superintendent can speak to that and how does the district's strategy align with the implementation and expectations at the school site? Through the chair.

Go ahead, Dr. Lewis.

Through the chair, Dr. Gallin, good question. Let me just say that All of our efforts has been really trying to see how we can improve on the recruiting efforts to improve the attendance within our schools. And there has been a considerable amount of work around that, really working with the office that Dr. Cabrera actually oversees. working directly with the region and, of course, within our schools to talk about different strategies that they can actually employ to bring about that recruitment piece. So there has been efforts along those paths, sir.

Follow-up, Mr. Chair? Of course. Is there anything distinct from what the principals are expected to do outside of their job descriptions and expectations pursuant to that particular effort that's coming from the district through the chair?

Through the chair, no, Dr. Gallin. No.

All right. I'll stop there. But those are my concerns relative to this particular item and what I do know about being a principal. And my last point was my first point. The denial of access to increased compensation through no fault of my own will be, in essence, a penalty because you'll have principals that are eligible to receive it. And some may not be, and it's not through their efforts or lack thereof. So I'll reserve further comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Dr. Gallin. Vice Chair Colucci.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the maker of the item. I do like this conversation around enrollment, attention. However, I do have to agree with my colleagues on this one, having been in a school site for 26 years. There are days when we would, weeks, where we just have more and more children coming in, and quite honestly, it was beyond the principal's control or anybody's control. There are times when students It's beyond their control. There are times when a school is given a magnet program by the district that has nothing to do with the principal deciding on it. That could be a retention and recruitment piece that they really didn't have anything to do with. but somebody else didn't get that. So those are all things that concern me about the item. Having been in a school, that's a very big concern, and I have to echo the sentiments of my colleagues on this one, that it is just something, while I do recognize the spirit behind it, that it's to elevate and increase our enrollment, I just, linking the two things together, the compensation with something that's beyond the principal's control is something that I have a very deep concern about. So those are my thoughts on the item. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Madam Chair?

Yes, thank you very much. And first and foremost, to the maker of the item, I think it's great to get all the information as much as we possibly can because we can always enhance and improve everything we have. But the part that I do have the concern about having been a principal myself for many, many years in many different schools in the south area, in the central region. I mean, I've been all over the place. And there are many factors that affect us. So one of the schools I was at, Sunset Elementary, an amazing magnet program. And I always say we're victims of our own success. We are victims of our own success. Sunset, a great program, International Studies, wait list year in and year out. I had a great opportunity. I'd probably be at the very top. But it's not fair when I was over at another school, I'm not gonna name the school, but another school that didn't have that same option. Or when I was at another school where they had a lot of charter schools in competition with a public school. Principals are supposed to be instructional leaders, and that's their number one priority. I mean, that's based on stature, period. And that's their main priority. I love... getting all the other information, but maybe, you know, looking at this with possibly deleting number five because number five for me is the one that gives me the biggest hiccup because then, you know, you are you're going to create a situation where principle A is gonna be very upset at principle B because that one is getting an enhancement and the other one is not gonna get one more red cent and working just as hard but with different sets of circumstances. So when I had the compensation study done, if you all remember, you all unanimously approved it. I know that administration was looking very closely at different models when we were going to implement it, and it's imperative that we are very fair to those that are at the helm of our schools, because nowadays they have more responsibilities than ever before, and we had plenty when we were there, but that's multiplied even more so through the years, and that we don't lose the responsibility The thought that, you know, we are instructional leaders as principals of schools. That is our goal, to give the best instruction possible to those children so that they can succeed academically. Yes, it's great. And you put down that this is a feasibility analysis. Again, here, which is great because feasibility, I have no problem. I think it's good. We can always learn from all of this. Conducting a review of the current compensation structure, again, for school-based administrators, including any existing salary differentials, and all associated statistics. I went down all of them. I'm not going to read them all, but the ones that give me the, you know, the main one that gives me the hiccup is, again, setting a or developing a differentiated compensation for performance-based type and framework for base leadership because there's so many situations that they simply cannot control. And so without that one, I'd be a whole lot more comfortable than, and I don't know how my colleagues feel, I just don't wanna see our principles divided when they can't control the situation. So that would be the concern that I have, and maybe we can talk a little bit more about it. Again, I don't know how my colleagues feel about that, but if we could make it something, the feasibility study where we're not creating that culture then it's something that I think would would be a positive thing to get information even though a lot of the things we're already doing but again we can you know we are we're doing a lot of things already but we can enhance it and you know I won't have a problem with that but I do have the concern with with again dividing our principles in a culture that would not be a positive one in my opinion.

Thank you Madam Chair. Board Member Blanco.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. To the maker of the item, as everyone has mentioned, truly appreciate the thought because we talk about it, right? At the end of the day, if we can increase enrollment, we can right-size a lot of the issues that we have. I, too, have some of the same similar concerns. I wrote down quickly, you know, is this fair? And I often tell my students when they love to use the phrase, this isn't fair, and I'm like, well, life isn't always fair, but This inherently creates a situation that is truly unfair, I think, to our administrators when there's so many factors outside of their control. I have one principal that I can say there's new developments going up and they are there every single day. They're catching people on the way in. They're bringing them for tours. They sign up. And two weeks later, they withdraw to another school. So they recruited them. They got them. They weren't able to keep them, but for factors that was not because they didn't put in that work, right? And then some of the concerns I have are really perception, okay? As we've mentioned, some principals or some schools naturally attract a lot of students, right? because of their special programs, because of reputation, because of their location, for whatever reason it might be. And so it puts these other schools. But the other thing is, and I think as a board, we have all said that we are always in agreement with feasibility studies. At this moment in time right now, I have a tough time even looking at feasibility, okay? Because to me, if we're going to invest time and effort to look into the feasibility of something, it's to have some faith that we're gonna be able to do it. Given our financial situation right now, I would prefer to direct our efforts in doing research and doing this something that's more immediate rightsizing as opposed to looking at an expenditure, right? Because even though recruiting students, retaining students in the long run will create some revenue, but to the idea that we're committing or we're gonna look into a research, giving incentives, financial incentive to someone when we're not in a position to be able to do that is just really hard for me right now to even look into the feasibility of that. And again, it's more about The efforts that we need to do now, I just think need to be focused on something else. And perhaps there comes a time where this could be addressed in other ways, you know, without trying to, while mitigating the issues that we've already discussed. But right now, like I said, to me, I have a tough time at this moment in time with any item where we're looking at feasibility when we know we don't have the funds to cover some of the things that we need to cover, right? When we're looking for savings, how are we putting in effort to look into additional expenditures? I just really, really have a tough time with that. And then the other thing with the perception is... This is part of a principal's role, right? And I see it. I see it day in and day out when I visit my schools. They talk about it. They tell me the things that they're doing. They put on, you know, their PTA helps to create these community events because they want to show what a great place the school is and what a great community it is. But at the same time, and I think it's what Board Chair alluded to, their primary focus needs to be on the education and the instruction that's happening in that building, the morale of the teachers, supporting the teachers. And when we talk about incentivizing that, it's almost as if we're making that their priority. And their priority, while it is part of what they need to do, In my mind, their priority is providing a stable, good education inside that building. And so those are some of the concerns that I have with the item. So thank you.

Thank you, Board Member Blanco. Board Member Santos had not had an opportunity to speak yet.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. I'll echo most of the sentiments that my colleagues have shared, but I think what's coming up, and it's a very important thing to address, is the idea that you have an instructional leader, number one job of a principal, absolutely, but our schools also need operational leaders. And our principals obviously do a fantastic job at that, but as was mentioned, those pieces of their role are not necessarily attached to their role in statute and what the law says they must do. And so I know that there are models across the nation where, and even locally, where we have, you know, like a operations leader. And I know that maybe a lot of assistant principals end up taking on some of that, you know, specific duty. But I do think it is important to think about what the current landscape that has been created around education leads us to have to evolve into. I don't necessarily love that I see some options, schooling options across the nation that are assured doing a fantastic job on marketing and delivering atrocious results academically. That is not what we want to land in ever. but we are playing in that same landscape. And so for all the different changes that have been made in policy and in the competitive landscape of schooling, it's not something we can afford to ignore in a way that really is, sometimes I think detrimental to our leader's ability to focus on, again, being that instructional leader, because they do have these other very important now added responsibilities. And I do think, I hear, you know, especially Board Member Blanco on the, you know, incentive structure and how we could even consider that in this moment. But I do think that the analysis and the, and the thought exercise of how we are going to measure and support our principles, specifically around enrollment, is needed, which I think is the intent of the item, that we need to, in a much more clear way, shout out, support, love on the people who are doing this really well, and also more directly hold accountable where things are not necessarily going. And I think, yes, there are lots of factors outside of a leader's control. And also I'm of the belief that like at the end of the day, Our principals are CEOs, and I've seen it. I've seen schools where there's explanations of a lot of factors for why enrollment isn't going up, and you get the right leader in there, and they figure it out, and they break all those outside factors, and they start to deliver, to some extent, obviously. There's limitations to that. You're not just going to create kids in a neighborhood. It doesn't happen. All that to say, I support the direction that the rest of the board was giving on maybe striking number five, but really, I think the intent of this item and what it's getting at is a really important conversation for us to have. And I do think that there is room to more directly tie it to what our principles are incentivized to review and look at beyond, as we know, their school budget, because their school budget is completely based on that enrollment. So they already have a financial incentive. When you have a bigger budget, you have more students, you're able to do more as a principal, that makes your job easier. So there is some tie there, but it's not explicit, it's not as direct as I think, unfortunately, the world that we've created in education. requires us to do. I also love that through the data that's required in the first few recommends we will get a refresher because our district has as has been shared done tremendous work around analyzing compensation to be fair and tied to the let's say you know, everything from size of the school to grade level configuration, I think a refresher on that would be very helpful so that we can get reassurance that really, you know, pay is tied to to some level, the differentiated job duties of different schools. But I do wonder if it's time to more explicitly revisit the roles and responsibilities of leaders within our buildings so that we can continue to compete in this landscape. Thank you.

Thank you, Board Member Santos. I mean, just real quick, I'm sorry. I mean, that's sort of what I indicated at the top of my comments of saying If this item was geared towards how does the district or the region become equipped to support the recruitment, that'd be one thing. I have a harder time when it's flipped the other way, where it's coming up from the bottom. But Board Member Colucci, you had additional comments. And then Board Member McGowan, yes.

And thank you, Mr. Chair. And one other thing, number three, and actually number two, the five-year enrollment trends, if we're basing that on a principal, In 25 years, I had eight different principals. That's an average of one per three years. There were some that lasted longer, some that lasted less time. It's gonna be, based on those numbers, something very difficult to track based on the fluidity of how principals are moved around in our districts. And again, that's something that doesn't come from the principal. It's like you enlist and you are sent where you have to go. And it could be one end of the county or the other. And you have to go, when you sign up as a principal, that's what you have to do. So these are all factors within the item that we, if we decide to move forward, but again, I'm of the mindset with Board Member Blanco that at this time, even a feasibility study, you know, it's something, if we're not going to do this on compensation because we all seem to have an issue with it, and to invest staff time and staff resources in doing a whole feasibility study on something that we're not inclined to do right now because we're financially I don't know if it's worth moving forward or if we amend it, and that's up to the board, but at this point in time, I'm not inclined to support the item as it is. Those are my comments.

Thank you, Board Member, Vice Chair Colucci. Board Member Gamble.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. And again, I want to echo the sentiments expressed by our colleagues as it relates to the maker of the item and the spirit of the conversation. I think what the item has potentially done it's conflated two particular issues that one is fully supported, is the continued review and analysis of enrollment, retention, and recruitment, but the fiscal issue relative to compensation, for me at least, especially at number five, is a non-starter. And so I think the conflation of those particular issues is what has caused some consternation. So I would like to just offer maybe a friendly amendment for a discussion. I think I've overheard through the chair general consensus on number recommend one, general consensus on recommend two, save the comment by vice chair as it relates to whether or not a five-year enrollment trend would have a nexus to the principal as opposed, board member Alonzo, to the school. Because she's absolutely right. The nexus to the principal may not be there, but the nexus maybe to the school could be relevant. So whatever, it's three or five years, but it could not be a nexus reasonably and fairly and accurately to the principal because of the fluidity of principal transfers. Number three, indicators for recruitment and retention that could be utilized. I could support that except using it for an incentive framework. So if it's a non-starter in number five, the incentive framework will be a non-starter in recommend three. Now, what we could contemplate and what some schools do, and I've been a part of this process, is utilizing that as a performance evaluation framework that could be tied to that, and that would be something that's fair across the board, because it may not rest solely with the outcome, which outcomes are important, but the region, the district, the superintendent can acknowledge and Recognize the effort. So if a school has done all of the things and more But they can't control the erection of a new facility. They can't control a demolishing of a housing project They can't control some of the other issues, but they can put forth a marketing plan community involvement activities social media Strategies they have activities, you know falling out of the ear at the school. Every day you look around, something's great happening at the school. The principal, I think I missed you, Mr. Superintendent, at the youth musical. Yeah, I know, I saw you on Facebook. You was on somebody else's page. So that's a point. My principals in my district were there, and I didn't know you were there. Yeah, they were there. So they were there. That's on a Saturday, Board Member Alonzo. So they're there with tables trying to engage the public around the arts and programs that they have. And again, I was there. I wasn't required to be there. They may have been required to be there, or they thought that it was wise to be there.

Strongly encouraged. Strongly encouraged, right?

So those are things that someone can take into account. And in the evaluation process, you usually have an opportunity to have that conversation. What have you done above and beyond your day-to-day operational requirements? So I would just look at maybe incentive framework and maybe exploring that as a part of the performance evaluation framework. Retention can be relative. So if you had 300 kids in the school, and by the end of the year, 20 students withdrew, there's a way you can measure why those children withdraw. So if you had a family of five that moved to Atlanta, you can't fault the principal. But if you have 15 families that moved out because they were not getting a response, they thought that the staff was unprofessional, they were not getting the support, we usually have what are called exit surveys, where you survey children and families when they leave. And I would always do that. And sometimes you could actually convince them to stay. OK, now some of you do say, thank you. What do I sign? You know, you might want to. Yeah, I didn't get that right. I think Dr. Baglow's got that. You know, some that leave you like, thank you, Jesus. Just be safe, you know. But, you know, we but that the point is you're having a conversation before someone leaves your school. And I think that's important for reflecting on what the parent, the end user thinks. what their experience has been at your school. And that conversation not being had is a missed opportunity. So I think that could be looked at. Number four, It's a non-starter because of the conversations we're having. Funding. That's a non-starter. My last comment would be I look at some of these items from a policy standpoint, from practices, what do we do? For those who say we don't look at it, you have to look at it from the politics of it. in the public relations. And I don't think it will be a prudent approach to have a conversation about amplifying compensation for administrators. And that's that narrative that can evolve around this particular issue. So through the chair, those are my recommendations for some revisions or amendments. And if you're receptive to that, I think that can kind of get us to continuing the conversation that we need to have, but also given the superintendent who I think wanted to speak an opportunity to respond to some of these issues as it relates to what they're already doing, as the chair mentioned. A lot of things we're already doing, but how we can strengthen that as well. Thank you. Mr. Chair.

One second, Mr. Superintendent. I was just going to ask the superintendent if we can learn a little bit, because I did speak with staff a little bit about it, and there was some tie to enrollment, so that's where I wanted to kind of get some understanding. Mr. Superintendent.

Yeah, so the amendment, and I typically don't do this, but on this one I'm just going to kind of request right now with our principal evaluation process, there are targets that we set together. And right now we actually included enrollment as one of those pieces. So let's say enrollment now is a huge issue for the district, it's an issue for your school, but two or three years on the line it may be something else, right? So what I wouldn't want this is to be a permanent statement on having enrollment as a metric in the evaluation process, but maybe a consideration. Because we always have what, three? Three goals that they're setting, right? Three goal setting pieces. They own some, and then we as a school district, based on what we're experiencing, we may want to add one specific to that. My concern is that it becomes a fixed issue on the performance evaluation, Dr. Gallin.

Go ahead, Dr. Gallin.

Through the chair, I think Board Member Alonzo, the language he used that it could be does not obligate you. So it's really what you all decide that could be considered. So I don't think it's something that's obligatory. But I'll defer to the maker of the item. But he had the word could. He didn't say shall.

Thank you. All right, first of all, thank you to the entire board. I think these are very constructive conversations. Look, we put a lot of pressure on our principals. I'm out there, and I see what they're going through. And to Dr. Gallin's point, this is part of their responsibility, but they're also construction managers in a lot of the GOB schools and regular schools. They're maintenance managers. They're social workers. They're counselors to their teachers as well as to the parents. and the students, there's so much that we ask of principals every single day. And on top of that, we then put the enrollment pressure on them. We need enrollment. We need enrollment. And as we said, everything ties back to enrollment anyways, because that's your FTE. That's how your school gets funded. So either way, whether we want to think about it or not, there is a link to it in that enrollment will impact the financial abilities of that school to be successful in what they're doing. So I'm in complete agreement. It was a thought as we look through it on could we incentivize? Could we look at something within the compensation package that principals receive? I understand the moment that we're going through right now, but you always have to invest in order to be able to get back in returns. Right. But I'm OK with striking four or five. I have no problems with that. I think this will give the administration a great opportunity to review it and maybe even review, you know, just the overall evaluation process. Right. How are you evaluating and what are all those responsibilities? As board member Santos said, you know, as we look at the evolving enterprise of this school district, right, that role of a principal carries a lot of responsibilities. And how are we evaluating? properly evaluating those different tasks and responsibilities that are given to a principal and then how are we recognizing them. So I'm in full agreement that I will make those changes so that we can continue this conversation that I think is very important because we're asking principals to focus on enrollment. We're asking them to go out into the community So I think it's important that we find ways in which we better evaluate how enrollment trends are going in schools and how it is that certain programs are being effective inside of schools. Some of them might not be working. And of course, the area, the school in which it is has a lot to do with it. So we can't just say this is the way that we do it district wide. I think through the regions, we'll be able to better evaluate that. So thank you all once again for all your feedback. I will be striking four and five. off of this board item and bringing it back to our board meeting for us to have a final vote on it. Thank you. I'll entertain a motion to...

Yes, three. Did you look at three?

And in three, we'll be changing the language around to match. Yes. Entertain a motion to transmit without a record.

Before you do, one more comment, please. I just want to make sure that we do not forget the main reason why your principals are at schools. They are the instructional leaders. I know they're everything else under the sky. We've done it. We've been there, done that. But their main goal is to make sure that as instructional leaders, they provide a quality education program of excellence to all of our children so that they can reach their maximum potential. And I want to make sure that we don't forget that. I personally do not have a problem with a feasibility study. I think it's good. And I know we're going through difficult times, but We do a lot of feasibility studies now that these changes have been made. I did have a major concern before, so I will be supporting this item with the changes made. And at the proper time, once the changes have been made, then I guess we can co-sponsor.

How about we entertain a motion to transmit without a recommendation?

Okay, second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed? Thank you. Mr. Chair, you have the mic.

Thank you so much, Board Member Espino, Vice Chair, for managing our meeting through there. That now concludes our H items. We will now take a motion to recommend the H items to the Board meeting of Wednesday, March 11th.

Move it. Point of order, Mr. Chair. I think we did that individually. Yes, we did. We did? Okay.

So we'll now move over to contract extensions with Ms. Munford. Do we have any questions or comments for Ms. Munford? Okay, with none, we'll now move to legislative update. I know Mr. Tony Olivario has been working very hard in Tallahassee together with the team. I've witnessed them. Thank you for all your hard work. If you have any updates, I know we've talked about it earlier during budget through committee, but if you have any other updates for the board, we're here. And if any board members have any questions, you're not recognized.

Thank you through the chair. Legislative updates were provided under separate memo, and there really hasn't been much else. All the information that we had through this past Friday, House and Senate are in committee sessions. We're in day 51 already. House and Senate have not begun speaking yet on the budget, so we are looking at an extended session.

All right, I see that Board Chair Rojas has some questions.

Thank you. Really more comments and questions. First of all, thank you again, Mr. Uyivari, to you and the team. I know you've been working arduously and tally. I really liked a lot of what I read in the update that you have given us, and one of the areas which I liked was SB 1718, which is the one dealing with the educator certifications, which is very, very critically important, especially with the fact that we're having a real big problem recruiting teachers, so this is going to make life a lot easier for us to be able to recruit even more so. I also was looking at the one for public school personnel compensation, which is SB 1216, and that one for me is great because I've been advocating for pre-kindergarten teachers on a continuous basis. And this would be including pre-K teachers, non-instructional staff, and school administrators. Again, to broaden and recognizing the degrees, the advanced degrees that they have. So I like that one. The Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights was also one that was very interesting when I read it. And the one for education exceptional students and video cameras in public schools. It says that the bills here would mandate that each school district school board would adopt a policy to provide video cameras in self-contained classrooms upon a parent's written request. And it would prohibit schools and districts from obscuring an employee's identity in any video recording and require that video recordings be made available for viewing must include the accompanying audio. The House bill passed it and the Senate bill was voted favorably as well. That's going to be interesting to see where that one ends up. The one with the counselors, very, very critically important. And I have several others, and I am not gonna go through all of them, but I will go to the last one at this point, and that's the one that we have been all advocating for, and that one has to do, again, with the cost sharing for the Schools of Hope. That one is something that we are all been striving to attain and I think that we're going in the right direction in that particular arena so that it's a fair process. And it identifies here the key changes to the rule where they talk about the application cap and how now a HOPE operator can now submit no more than five notices, again, for their intent to co-locate. And that's within a single 12-month period statewide. And also that you have to notify the district at least one year before the plan opens. And then the facility is only eligible if at the time the building notice is submitted, its facility utilization rate of 75% or lower. or if it has a surplus of 400 student stations. And the four year rule is the new public schools are protected, a facility has to be at least four years old to be eligible to be able to co-locate. But most importantly is the utility costs that districts now, again, are now explicitly permitted to charge HOPE operators for the incremental costs of electricity, water, et cetera, and the mutual plan that will be agreed to. I find them very, very interesting, a lot of others, but these are the main ones that when I reviewed, I thought were very pertinent to the conversations that we've been having with our friends in Tallahassee, and hopefully everything will continue to move in the right direction. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Board Member Santos, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, I echo the sentiments on all the work that's being done in Tallahassee. I know we've had calls, texts, all the things, and in-person meetings, so I appreciate it. Following up on some of the chair's comments, the bill that would require cameras with audio in ESC classrooms, does the bill have any stipulations for funding of those cameras through the chair?

Through the Chair at the moment, it does not have any stipulations related to funding of the cameras or maintenance of the cameras. Okay, let's see. It presently has been passed in one subcommittee on the Senate and hasn't moved any further.

Okay, thank you so much. Through the Chair, I know we've had some discussions, Mr. Livari, on the bills that would tangentially affect either SB 180 or our ability to continue working with the county on our impact fee study, which if we don't get some changes, this legislative session would basically run out of time and we'd have to probably begin again. So can you give us an update on that? what language we've been able to introduce or not and where?

Through the Chair, we have met with several of the legislators to try and improve some of the language. As written, Senate Bill 840, which is the one that was introduced in an attempt to address the consequences of Senate Bill 180 from last year, That has fully passed and we were in agreement with the language as it went. So we really had not introduced any additional language to Senate Bill 840. We are still waiting to hear as to where it stands on the other chamber.

Thank you. Through the chair, so through the language that is currently in SB 840 or 840?

Through the chair, 840.

In SB 840, it would give the county the flexibility they have been seeking, not just for our impact fees, but for many other issues they're having with that bill. But it would also include the issue that the county attorneys were having with our work around impact fees through the chair.

Through the chair, yes. The county was okay with the language that was in the bill and how it would affect. And if I'm misunderstanding the question, I apologize. But the county was in agreement with the language as written as well.

Thank you. That's great. I was just making sure that the language that the county was supporting was inclusive of our issue through the chair.

through the chair, yes it is.

Okay, wonderful, thank you. And then lastly, on the Schools of Hope rule change proposals, I'm glad to see some of our feedback be implemented. There were certainly some pretty important issues that I think remain to be discussed and more thoroughly hashed out. And specifically, I was having a community meeting and this came up and I wanna make sure we're all super clear. Currently, the cost-sharing language in that bill allows for, yes, some negotiation of what fee would be charged, but it also stipulates that any appropriation related to transportation or food and nutrition would be basically a direct pass-through at the level that each student gets, is that correct?

Yeah, Mr. Chair, Ms. Santos, yes. It says that if that student were to generate any of those funds in that categorical, then we would get that money to help offset the required cost that we would have.

Thank you. So through the chair, for example, our students who receive funds through the transportation categorical because they qualify for public transit add up district-wide to about $30 million. That's what we get through the transportation state funding allotted to us. but we spend $100 million, close to $100 million, on actually providing transportation to our students. What I'm drawing attention to is that it is great that if a student's generating any funding under a categorical, it is forwarded to the school. It would be incorrect to say that that then covers the cost incurred to provide that service. Because they certainly do not for our current students that qualify for, again, for example, a transportation categorical. Is that correct through the chair?

Yeah, Mr. Chair, Ms. Aldrich, that is absolutely correct. That, in fact, on the safe schools allocation in particular, Our allocation actually really wouldn't go up with another kid. First off, that kid more than likely was our student prior. But even so, the categorical statewide is fixed. So it's not like the new kid enters and an additional dollar pops into the Safe Schools allocation. The Safe School allocation remains flat. So for all intents and purposes, we wouldn't get any extra money actually for that Safe School child.

And through the chair, when it comes to food and nutrition, I know that's another one that's specifically called out here. Obviously, I've been doing a lot of work in transportation, which is how I knew that $30 million to $100 million comparison. What is the equivalent of that for food and nutrition? How much are we being funded, and then how much are we actually spending through the chair?

Yeah, so Mr. Chair, Ms. Santos, pull that up at E1. So... For our food service, total federal reimbursement is $96 million. Our total expenditures are $116 million right now. I will say, though, food service is slightly different, I think, than transportation and safe schools. And I think the superintendent wants to talk a little bit more about transportation, but I would agree wholeheartedly that the language around safe schools and transportation basically guarantees that the district will take a loss regardless of regard on those two issues. For food service, it's more complicated than that because a lot of the expenses are really much more under our control and how we run that program is different. So I think there are absolutely inequities in the current rule that I would love to see changed legislatively or otherwise. I wouldn't focus too much on food service because I think we have more control in that area.

Thank you so much. And Mr. Superintendent, did you want to add something before I continue?

Yes, Mr. Chair. So, you know, we're going through major negotiations regarding Schools of Hope, and the transportation is one that we're still working through. I had conversations about that yesterday. There are two items in the landscape that we're still working through, and so transportation is one, because at the end of the day is we want to be equitable with what we're doing across all children. And so that's the one piece that we still have some conversation pending.

Thank you. So that was one of my biggest concerns, that although we've made some progress, the way things are written, we would still be at a loss. We would essentially be having to invest from our current funds, not additional funds. And that obviously comes from the students that currently exist. So in some ways, we still haven't really solved the issue of ensuring that in this setup, current students in our public schools aren't at a loss or aren't having to divert some funding there. So I'm all for this as long as it's fair and I think it still has a ways to go. to be fair which is what i'm very clearly putting on the record um and and i think transportation is the most sort of jarring example of that for different reasons safe schools clearly being another one i hadn't thought of um okay through the chair i know the rule amendments also include some provisions around esc students and how they are counted for capacity um So my understanding is students who are on 254 and 255s are now counted as, through their calculation basically they will count for two students basically. We have discussed as a board that really what we need to get to is a place where our fish inventories reflect things like our adult students, who are very much students in classrooms, our early learning students, who are currently not counted for capacity, and again, a tiny step in the right direction, but we are so far from truly capturing in our schoolhouse inventories the utilization of our buildings. That is another fairness issue that has a long way to go in my opinion, even though we've made some progress. So my final question is what is our next, I know we've all been advocating having conversations around cost sharing with individual legislators according to our legislative plan, the superintendent as well, Mr. Livari, our lobbyist.

what's the next step in ensuring that we continue to get closer to a fair place with these rules through the chair so we will we will continue working with staff to determine you know if additional meetings need to be held to to review the rule as it was as it was amended and and see if there was any additional amendments that are needed

Thank you, through the Chair, it's clear additional amendments are needed. I mean, according to our own legislative plan, we're not where we need to be. So my question is, if the Board of Ed has a next meeting, April 17th, right? exciting you can spend it celebrating at the board of ed meeting advocating your favorite thing to do um it'll be a big celebration um so through the chair if we um obviously the public comment period was done so really at this point all that's left is our ability to vocalize what's left directly to the board of ed and to the commissioner I would like some reassurance that we're doing that, that we're actively taking steps before that next Board of Ed meeting to ensure that our position is very clear.

Through the Chair, we will continue going to Tallahassee and meeting with Department of Education and taking any suggestions that we may have.

Thank you. It is, I think, obviously right now we're negotiating only with one provider and in a smaller number of schools. I think what is very important is not to forget that even though we might get to a really good place with this one provider, there are rules that will dictate this for years to come for every other provider that comes and for a much larger number of schools. So I was hopeful I would get a stronger response on our plan of action. We've been very involved, we've sent comments, we've all met with our legislators, we are still very far from where we need to land. We've made great progress. So what is our plan of action to get closer to where we need to be?

Superintendent? Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Maybe I'll be a little bit stronger with this statement, Ms. Santos. So right now, all that was provided is administrative rule, okay? A next step has been discussed already, which I think it will be the next legislative season, right? It will be what items do we have to legislatively maybe improve as well. So we're headed in that direction, and there have been some recommendations that were made that were not captured in the rulemaking because they're based by categories. And so those are... additional steps that hopefully legislatively we can take care of. Right now, if you notice, the big, big issue that I believe was addressed predominantly was the cost-sharing piece. We got extensions with some timelines. The cap is a real good one, I must say, and that cap wasn't even legislatively included, so that's a good one. I believe there's additional items that in the next legislative season can be taken up. I'm just being really honest. I think we're gonna stay right now at the administrative rule. One thing that we've discussed, and I'll say it here because I've told everybody, is A and B schools considered persistently low performing. That's another one that's out to play. But as we move forward legislatively, we need to bring those issues up, space as well, that hopefully will open the possibility for legislative change.

Okay, I'll leave it at that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Any further questions or comments? Thank you again, Mr. Olivari, and your entire team over in Tallahassee for all your hard work and everything that you do for our district. All right, the next item on the agenda is new business for many board members. Do we have any new business? Board Member Blanco, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Last month, I brought up some questions and some concerns over the monthly, we now ask for monthly reports of any expenditures over $50,000 that were exempt. I didn't receive one this month. Maybe I missed it, but that was one thing that I wanted to bring up. One of the concerns I had back then, and it's not specific to the one line item that I brought up, because one of the line items that I had asked for more information about, and thank you to Ms. Mumford, you're right on it, you got me the information, had to do with professional development. And listen, I'm the first one to understand we need to have professional development, our teachers need to get training and anything new that's going on, fully in support of that. But at the beginning of the year when we had some conversations about the budget and we started to have conversations about enrollment, I had a meeting with Mr. Steiger and I specifically asked, how much lower can we go on enrollment before we really start to have some significant concerns? And he gave me a number. And then I met with Mr. Superintendent, I met with you after that, it was like, okay, so what are we going to do to tighten up some things to ensure that there are no layoffs, right? Because the layoffs was a big thing that was being discussed, and we wanted to ensure that human capital would not be impacted. And one of the assurances that I was given is that PD would be something that we would look at, and that travel for PD would be something that we would need to shut down. I'd like to get a report of any travel that has taken place for PD from the beginning of the year to now or anything that is upcoming because my understanding is that there is significant amount of travel that continues to happen. And again, with some explanation, if there has been, I think there are some things that sometimes you have to be able to be flexible with. I don't believe in always an absolute, but I'd like to perhaps within the next week or so get some of that data, and then also if someone can provide some clarification as to whether there was a report sent out this month or not through the chair.

Sure, so Mr. Chair, on the exemptions report, you will get that. I think our month target since the... I think the month target is actually the end of this week. So I think we are on track to get it out by the end of this week. Remember, February is somewhat of a short month. So I think we have until the end of this week to get it out. As to the travel, happy to get you that report. I will say that travel has been severely reduced. Yes, there's travel taking place. But if it's for PD, I mean, I will let you know because I'll get you the exact report, but it is almost assuredly on a grant. The amount of PD on the general fund has been reduced to pretty much nothing. So if there is PD going on, it's grant-related, but we will make sure to get you the entire report, grant and not grant.

Okay, and just as a follow-up, I do want to clarify, to your point, and I forgot to mention, the one PD item that I had brought up, I did see in the detailed information that Ms. Mumford provided that it was based on a grant. So that's great if it is. I'm just, again, I know and I'm aware that there is a lot of travel going on. That was one thing that I was told we would curtail if needed. If it's on a grant, fine. I would just like to see itemized the amount of travel and, you know, for things of that nature for this school year.

We can get that for you.

Thank you.

Thank you. I now recognize Ms. Maridera-Rojas.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. The $50,000, any contracts that are below that, I've been asking for that. So hopefully I will get that eventually. But moving on to the issue of travel, I have brought it up as well. I've spoken with the superintendent in depth about this. All travel... If it's not grant funded, we need to really revisit that very, very carefully, and this has been an ongoing conversation that I've been having with the superintendent as well, in depth. And there are other areas that we have discussed, so I'm not gonna get into it now, and I hope, Mr. Superintendent, that as we discussed previously, sir, that you could put in writing what is being done so that the board knows exactly the different areas that are going to be curtailed, and you've been doing it. Like how many, the travel that you've had, right? Has anyone gone traveling with funds that are not grant funded? But again, from our general fund, I think that that's something that you have been really working on tirelessly to make sure that it goes through the grant funded positions and not through the general funds. But we have to make sure that everybody understands, because then you hear people are traveling, but Nobody knows that people that are traveling are traveling through grant-funded positions and not necessarily are we using our general funds. During times when we could travel and go to conferences and do all those things, go get the different awards and all that, it was great. But if we're in the situation, the financial status that we find ourselves in, then we have to all make certain sacrifices. So maybe if we could just make sure that the information is submitted in writing so people can see all of the things that your administration is doing right now to address the areas that have been brought up.

Mr. Superintendent, you're recognized. And I think Mr. Bueno, did you also have? Okay.

Mr. Rojas, I don't know where the miscommunication is happening. We were very clear that there is no travel based on general funds. It's just not happening. Everything that's been happening right now is grant funded. Mr. Bueno checks every travel request. And if it is a travel piece, we are working through grant funded pieces only.

I'm not questioning that through the chair. What I'm saying is we know, we've had discussions, right? But still we hear that certain people are traveling. Others have no clue because not everybody's tuned in to what's happening here, right? Our principals and others elsewhere don't have the same opportunities that we do to have a one-on-one with you and members of your team. So just putting in writings generalized, it doesn't have to be everything. I have not seen anything in writing, and I would like to have it in writing so that nobody can question everything that you're doing. You are doing the work. You're doing it, but it's not memorialized, and if it's not memorialized, then it's up for misinterpretation, let's say. Or, you know, people thinking that we're using general funds for something that we're not, because they're going through the grant-funded process. So if you could just put it in writing, I think it would make life a lot easier for everyone.

Thank you. Thank you so much, Board. I'm sorry, Mr. Chair? Did you have a final comment?

Yes. Madam Chair, just for clarity, the communication for whom to whom?

First of all, starting with the board, let's start off with us. And the principals at the schools, the administrators, many times have no clue what's happening. Their travel has been restricted. Other areas have been restricted. It's been a verbal communication, but there's been nothing in writing. And I know that in the past we used to get it in writing. So I would just request consideration to put it in writing. I know you've gone to principals' meetings. I know you've addressed principals publicly. but it's not memorialized.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. I'm going to give you an opportunity to speak, but I just want to let you know, I've visited, and I know we all visit our schools, and all I've heard about is that all their budgets are frozen and that they can't travel and they can't purchase anything and they have to go through Mr. Bueno and get approvals in the region. So I've heard, I don't know what type of notification has been sent out. Maybe the superintendent can explain, but... But I'll tell you, I mean, I've heard it, and I hear it everywhere I go, because when I go to a grocery store, I sometimes bump into administrators, and they bring it up to me. So, Mr. Superintendent, if you want to explain how the notification has been sent out to administrators at the buildings.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's why I asked Ms. Rojas to tell me which group. So I just confirmed with Bueno, the principals, we have communicated to them in writing. The board, apparently, we have not. We've shared the ideas with the board, but a formal notification apparently has not been sent to the board, and we will do that, Ms. Rojas. We will do that.

All right, thank you. I appreciate that, and I'm glad that you communicated with the principals. I don't know when it was communicated, but I know when I spoke with some principals, they had not received anything, and they were being frozen their accounts and whatnot. So I'm glad that that happened, but the board needs to know what's happening and the follow-ups to requests that have been made to be addressed. Thank you.

all right thank you so much i have two more board members i think wanted to speak so miss blanco you up first all right thank you mr chair i just want to clarify so in my request i i don't think it's related completely to what um the board chair just said what i would like to have and if it's grant funded that's great but i would like to have itemized travel for professional development from this school year amount spent where the travel was to who went and if it was grant funded, the name of the grant that it came under. That's it. And I think you might have missed, you know, in the beginning, I referenced the conversation that we had where you told me that that wouldn't be happening. And I think the one part that the board chair mentioned, it goes to perception, right? So you and I had that conversation and you said, if one of the things we have to cut is travel, that's what we cut. And I'm not referring to your travel. I want to make that clear. I'm referring to travel across the district, okay? I know there's travel. If it's grant funded, great. I just want to see it because we don't want the perception to be that there is, not just moving forward, the past all school year, because we knew at the beginning of the school year that we were going to have some financial considerations to take into account. this school year, you know, from beginning to where we are now, and if there's something projected, and if there's something projected upcoming travel, the grant of which is going to come. That's what I was requesting, and I don't know if the other board members would like to see it as well.

Definitely. So I'm going to let Board Member Colucci speak first, and then we'll go back to you, Mr. Superintendent.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I just want a copy of that as well. That's all.

Okay, so you've now heard. Everybody would like copies on the reports on travel. If you have any closing remarks.

No, to Mr. Chair, to Ms. Blanco's point, I get it, absolutely. Because, you know, you see folks traveling and they automatically don't know the source of the funding. So, absolutely, I understand that perception. And that's an easy misperception to have. But I understand your request, particular to professional development, regardless of how it was paid for. Correct? Correct.

Well, I'd like to know how it was paid for.

Yes. Right. And it will be delineated, grant or not grant or what source, Title I or Title II. So we have different mechanisms of funding. All of these are grant funded, but you'll get the category as well. But I truly understand the nature of the request.

Perfect. Thank you so much.

Excellent. Any further questions or any other new business items? Okay, thank you. We now go to staff follow-up. We did get two staff follow-ups. One was on H11 and the other one was on H15. Are there any questions or comments regarding these two staff follow-ups? Yes, Board Member Santos, you're recognized.

Thank you so much, Board Member Alonso. On the staff follow-up for the waste cost realignment and efficiency review, I want to thank staff for so thoroughly actually going above and beyond what the item requested and want to make sure I share some things. First of all, very excited to see the 40 schools that are launching that textile recycling. It will be very interesting to see how much waste diversion that will create. I'm very happy to see that in the analysis that was done, we will realize some savings. I know it's stated there that that's a projected savings. But it is always a great day when just reflecting and analyzing gets us to a position where we can save dollars and reinvest them into these programs. So thank you for that. The... There was an interesting note in there about 90% of schools having recycling awareness, but 36% only representing that they have the adequate bins. So I am hopeful we will get a grant to be able to provide those bins to those schools. Again, the more they can divert, the more we can save on our waste management. And so that's very exciting. The savings that were expected there through the targeted service level alignment, when can we expect an update on that, a follow-up on when we will be able to actualize those savings by putting the different routes or service levels into effect?

Through the chair, Mr. Alonso. Yes, Ms. Santos. So we're referencing the hauling services that are taking place currently. And basically, just so everyone understands, obviously, going back to the conversation of enrollment, right? Enrollment's a factor in a lot of things. And here we go, talking about recycling, hauling. And in the past where schools had large enrollments with large bins, and now you might only need one bin and going out to the school. So basically, that's still in play right now. We're working with the vendor. We've identified more or less using that trend data, enrollment, as well as, you know, wait so far at certain halls, as well as the routes that they're taking. So we see this more or less as a 26, 27 school year return as we start to, between now and throughout the summer, start to make sure that schools are equipped with exactly what they need when it comes to bins, with the routes, and how many times the routes need to come to that school because of the capacity of all. So we look at this as an early fall 26, 27 return on investment where we can provide more or less a better update with that I believe it's like $107,000 that we had referenced inside the audit that we believe we can create as a cost reduction for the district based off of all the research that we're working with that vendor on.

Thank you. And so through the chair, you expect that starting next school year, you will actualize different routing and different service levels to realize these savings?

Through the chair, yes, Ms. Santos, because we're still, even though we have already done a lot of work in the sense of trying to figure out based off enrollment trends and a lot of these things we know just through data, but there also needs to take a physical walk-on basis that we're doing right now with the vendor, with staff from district ops. So with 26-27 fall, I believe we'll be confident in showing the returns based off of the revamping of more or less where we are realistically today than where this might have been placed back years ago when we started the recycling program.

Thank you. Thank you also through the chair for your staff really figuring out the next step of share tables to include refrigeration. I know some schools have figured it out and are doing it really well. I got to tell you I was so proud but also concerned because I was at a very large high school and the students are really leading. They made makeshift share tables essentially. What they're doing is around every bin in the courtyard they are leaving their unopened items which I know is not how we want to guide them, but we can take their lead and build on it. And it was beautiful to see so many students who weren't throwing away their unopened items and so many students who were grabbing it because they simply wanted that extra juice or the extra unopened bag of food. And I mean, they're leading. They're showing us the way. So I'm glad we're catching up to them and really delivering the solutions, the appropriate, sanitary, healthy way, safe way to do that. Composting, I have heard great reviews from the schools in my district that are doing it. Their number one ask is how do we expand to front of house? Back of house, and I know you and I have discussed this, is great, but it's so limited. Most of the waste is actually in the cafeteria, in the front of house. And so can you share what you're currently exploring to be able to get there?

through the chair yes so um miss santos as you know we have a pretty large work group based off of other board items that more or less talk a lot about this so what we're doing in uh in many instances basically utilizing best practices that we've learned from other schools and more or less sharing that process across so as a reference actually in this board follow-up there's a uh there's a conversation piece related to upcoming town hall right so one of the things that we did is we surveyed out all schools and asked about more or less ways in which we know that there's some waste realignment initiatives taking place and how we can get together these experts to come forth and more or less have a share out practice. And that's going to probably take place sometime in May where there's going to be a more or less like a town hall type scenario. where we're going to have entities inclusive of private partners and public partners and just individuals out there that we're going to share these ideas. And one of the ideas will be the front house composting, right? Staff from District Ops, we do have one individual within, Ms. Carley, that's basically very versed in this type of situation. However, there's a lot of dynamics in the sense of how we can make sure that cafeterias can run the way they need to run in pushing this initiative. Um, she's also has reached out, um, to other districts that have kind of been a little bit of front of the head, um, a couple in our state, um, that we have experiences with. So little by little, um, we're utilizing our experiences with this green school initiative, those schools that are kind of showed like very high initiative and kind of working with those schools first to talk about this as a best practice way of doing, allowing them to be kind of like the initiators. So then we, at that point in time, when we can kind of get the grip of those schools that we know have high interest. we can kind of share it out as a best practice district-wide. So those are a little bit, you know, it takes a little bit of time. Obviously, there's a lot of initiatives taking place day by day at every school, but little by little, the word is getting out there, as you referenced. I believe the follow-up on this item alone is really going to be a target push that district-wide, everyone kind of get a bite of the apple and understand the importance of this.

Thank you so much. I'll close out through the chair with thanking you and your team, the whole team, from food and nutrition, figuring out composting, with sustainability and waste. I mean, really, I see it's such a team effort. And it's directly not just doing the right thing, teaching our students the way of the future, but it's saving us money. It's part of our right-sizing initiatives. It's really making sure we're not paying for services we no longer need and being really smart and efficient. So thank you for that. I can't wait to see more and more of this.

Thank you so much, Ms. Santos, and thank you to staff for those reviews. With no further questions from the board, that exhausts. Board Member Spino, did you have a question or comment?

Yes, I just want to make a comment, Mr. Chair. With regards to the follow-up on H-15, I appreciate Mr. Bueno calling me Saturday during a soccer match with one of my sons to let me know that time had not been set with the sheriff's office to facilitate. The only thing I will say, and I was a little disappointed to find out that the meeting with bus patrol was not set until March 12th, which essentially would be after this meeting was even supposed to happen. So if we anticipate the extension necessary, I want to see a good faith effort in getting this resolved because the board obviously wanted this thing done sooner than later. That's all.

Absolutely. Board member Spino. And I was going to ask a question, but I, you know, sorry. I mean, do we have an update on when we will be meeting with the sheriff and, I mean, the board has given instruction to move forward on this, and I think it's something we all want to see all the groups come together. I know it's complex, but we've been waiting on months for this now. Mr. Superintendent.

Mr. Espino, Mr. Alonso, I completely understand. I made contact with the chair just recently, and all green lights have been given to work through the MOU. And then, yes, absolutely, the meeting with bus patrol was delayed, particularly because we wanted to make sure that the peace regarding the sheriff and that office was going to take place. I can discuss a couple of things offline if you would like, but trust me, it's not for lack of not pursuing it. It really was an issue of what needed to happen first before we take the next step. And that's simply it, but I will speak to Mr. Espino, Mr. Alonso, and kind of give you a little of a background from my take. All right, thank you so much, sir.

Thank you, and thank you, Board Member Espino, for your follow-up and continued effort on this, because we know the safety of our buses and our students is our number one priority. Okay, so that exhausts today's agenda. There's no further discussion. I move to adjourn this meeting. Can I get all those in favor? Aye. All right.

If we could do a quick transition and go ahead and have our academics committee take place now. All right, so I don't think I'm being overly ambitious in squeezing this in before lunch. We should be able to get through. If we could go ahead and get started.