Fiscal Accountability and Government Relations Committee - Regular Meeting

Apologize for being a few minutes late. Welcome to the Fiscal Accountability and Government Relations Committee meeting for Wednesday, September 3rd. I'm now calling to order the meeting. Can we please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance led by Dr. Gallin? We're going to remain standing just for one more minute. Okay, before we get started, I'd like to state the committee membership. Myself, Roberto Alonso as chair, Mr. Danny Espino as vice chair, Ms. Lisa Santos as a member, Mr. Joseph Geller as a member, and Dr. Dorothy Mendez-Mendigo as an alternate member. Our first order of business is to approve the minutes of the Wednesday, August 6th, 2025 Fiscal Accountability and Government Relations Committee meeting. Are there any questions or concerns with the minutes? Seeing none, may I get a motion to approve them?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Next order of business to move to the E items. Can I get a motion to move E items to the floor? All in favor? Aye. E1, Mr. Steiger.

E1 is the approval of the annual financial report for fiscal year 25.

Any questions or comments? No. E2, Mr. Steiger?

E2 is the non-expendable personal property inventory deletions and recoveries report for fiscal year 25. Any questions or comments? E14. Yeah, so, Mr. Chair, E14 through E16 are the three items that will be discussed at the second budget hearing at 6 o'clock next Wednesday. E14 is the millage, E15 is the capital work plan, and E16 is the final adoption of the 25-26 budget. Any questions or comments?

Okay, thank you. We now move to E18. Oh no, E17, sorry.

So yes, Mr. Chair, E17 through E27 are all of our final resolutions for the 24-25 year, one item per fund.

Are there any questions on any of the specific questions? Okay, we now go to E141.

Great. E141 is award of an ITB for the temporary cooling systems rental supply and install. Any questions or comments? No, okay, E142. E142 is request approval of a supplemental award.

Okay, see no questions or comments.

Next, E202. E201 is this month's request authorization to accept grants and donations.

Yes, your recognized, Ms. Ross.

Yes, thank you so much, Mr. Chair. And again, this is one that I look at very closely all the time. And sadly, on this one, I see a lot of decreases that have taken place. And then, of course, we have one with the same allocation. The first one is a decrease, which is the Individuals with a Disabilities Education Act, IDEA. And then the second one is also less than 1% decrease as well. for the disabilities IDEA. Can someone address that as to these? Sure, so yeah, Mr.

Chair, Madam Chair, both of those IDEA are obviously federally funded, given to us by an entitlement formula. So our reason for a drop is simply because we have less students.

So that's the reasoning for this drop this time. Okay, thank you.

Okay, any further question or comments? Thank you, Mr. Steiger. We now have E202. Mr. Bueno?

E202 is the adoption of the proposed 2026 state and federal legislative programs.

Do we have any questions or comments from the board?

No.

Yes, Ms. Blanco.

Thank you. I'm trying to find it real quick. I did have a question on something of Bright Futures because Bright Futures has changed something. I remember now what it was. I believe it One of the priorities was to recognize the African American Recognition Program as an awardee. They have changed all of those names, and it's now just a school recognition program.

Through the chair, I'm going to have Mr. Uliwadi expand.

Okay, thank you. It might just be a matter of tweaking the name, exactly what we're going to be advocating for.

Okay, so we'll go ahead and make that note and revise it.

Yeah, just kind of look into it too. And I'm going to bring this up. I've been in conversations with the Department of Education, and my team has also been in conversations with the academic department, but it might potentially tie here with Bright Futures. So ACT is no longer requiring science. It won't be part of their composite score. For this coming school year, for the class of 2026, bright futures at one point was going to require science, even though the universities weren't. I think part of my conversations, they've made some changes where what they've said is that if they get a science score, they'll calculate the composite off of four tests. If they don't, they'll calculate it off of three. Well, for some students, as they report scores, they may get science, but it might bump them out of the bright futures if they calculate it. So I think that it should be what would be most fair to the kids is that they'll take the highest composite. And so that would just be something to kind of look at and tweak and see if we need to get legislation involved or because I think that would be a legislative component, right? To see if we can get that result before this class graduates to get clarification for students on that. That's all, thank you.

Okay, thank you so much, Blanco. And I'm glad you brought up the bright futures. It was actually a discussion point at the consortium last week where our board is represented. And I can share with Mr. Louvier some of the feedback that we had at the consortium regarding the changes, because what it's making is making it more broad now. It's not specific to any group. So we can go over it and share. And if there's any changes, we can see it there. Okay, thank you. I did have a question. Last year, we did discuss and it was kind of a last minute priority when it came to the Live Local Act and the opportunity for our district to be able to leverage on that a little bit when we look at some of the repurposing of our properties and land. Where is it within our documents? Did we build it in or no?

It was not built into the current document, but I did note that we recently received a draft of the consortium's proposal, and it is listed on there, and I was going to be discussing that further, but I did notice that the Live Local Act was listed in the consortium's proposal.

program. Thank you so much. We should look at last year's because I know that as a board we did approve it later on in the legislative session to discuss it and there was some movement on it and what it does is it allows the school board to have some zoning control of these properties when it comes to educational villages and the opportunity for us to be able to build housing for our teachers on there which would make the process a lot smoother for this district as we want to move some of these projects because I know that Mr. Espino has a lot of experience in the zoning world, and once we're done approving one of these projects here and it goes back to a municipality or county, we could be looking at a very long extended process that could hamper our efforts to try to improve the quality of life for our teachers while also creating some income from these properties for us. So I think it should be one of our legislative priorities and one that already had a little bit of steam last session, and maybe we can get a little bit further this one. Noted. Thank you. Okay, any further questions or comments? Okay, so that now concludes all of our E items. Can we now take a vote to move all our E items?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All right, our next order of business is G items. Can we get a motion to move all the G items?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All right, our first one is G3, Mr. Harvey.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. G3 is final reading, board policy 6320.02, small and minority women and Veteran Business Enterprise Programs and Amendments to Policy for Commercial Anti-Discrimination in Business Practices. This is for final reading. And also G4, Amendments to Policy 9142, Diversity, Equity, and Excellence Advisory Committee. This policy is also for final reading, and this is to rename the committee the Education Opportunity and Access Advisory Committee. If there are any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Thank you.

Are there any questions or comments on G3 or G4? All right, seeing none, G7?

Yes, G7 is also, this is for initial reading. This is the pilot program that the board generally agreed to with regard to co-sponsorships. The board wanted to try this on a trial basis. It seems to work, the chair mentioned at the last meeting, maybe this is the time to move forward with the policy, so I'm bringing the policy to the board for its consideration. Okay, Ms. Rojas, your recommendation.

Yes, thank you, I just wanna thank our board attorney, Mr. General Counsel, sir, for always following up accordingly, and this has worked out beautifully. Very happy that we have this in place. I think it has made our meetings more efficient and to expedite them in the manner that I think is in the best interest of all those that we serve. So thank you very much for your work and for following up accordingly. And thank you to my colleagues because of all of you being so involved and participating in this in the manner that it was intended. It's been truly successful. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Any further questions? I wanted to take an opportunity, Madam Chair, to thank you for this idea and for following through on it and working with the board. I think it has made our meetings much more efficient. And I also want to thank Mr. Harvey, as always, for the great briefings and for also working on the objectives and the priorities of this board. to make sure that they're put in in a correct manner. So thank you so much for your follow through and all that. All right, with that, that concludes all of our G items. We'll now take a motion to move them. Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Okay, our next item that we have is contract extensions. Ms. Munford, do we have any?

So yeah, Mr. Chair, do you have any questions? Does any of the board members have any questions on contract extensions?

Any questions? All right, that was quick. All right, next we have our legislative update. Do we have any legislative updates? I know we're not in session right now, and we just had our agenda.

Through the chair, no, we don't, sir.

Any questions or comments? Okay, the next item is new business. I know we had a staff follow-up on the July 23rd agenda item in high school speed zone that was said. Is there any other new business by any board members? Yes, Ms. Santos.

I'm so sorry, Mr. Chair, I had to step out, but I did have some comments on G3, if the board would allow me to say them now. Thank you so much, I appreciate it. G3 is for final reading, and so I wanna just talk to my colleagues because specifically the amendments, I'm in total agreements with the amendments made on some of the policies here, so it's not all of them, but specifically on policy 6465. This one is not a repeal and replace, it is a simple edit, but there was some language in the first paragraph of that policy that I thought was really non-controversial and in alignment with what this board has said. I spoke to the attorney and asked about whether that language would in any way, shape, or form have any implications, and he clarified that it wouldn't, and I'm happy to have him clarify. But specifically, that first paragraph that is being stricken out is a general statement about us as a board and talks about, and I can just read it. Inherent in this policy is the board's commitment to ensuring that the rich tapestry of diversity, inclusion, of varying ideas, backgrounds, perspectives is, if collectively recognized, creates cultural value and endorses the board's obligation to eliminating perceived artificial or actual barriers to business engagement with the district. As is very clear in that language, there is no sort of gender, racial or any kind of other specific language in that first paragraph. But I thought it was really important to me that that language remain even in the face of the other changes that we are making to these policies. So I wanted to ask the board, because as I said, the other two policies I'm fine with moving forward.

Excuse me, I'd just like to know what page, I think we're all lost on where you are, and I have no idea what you're referring to, so please.

Yeah, of course, absolutely, happy to. Policy 6465, what page, please?

I'm sorry, she's referring back to previous, I don't think it's in any of our files, so would staff be able to provide us that original language?

Oh, let me be clear, so item G3. Right.

Mm-hmm.

On item G3, the first policy there, it's a long, not the 36-page policy, the next one, which starts with page one of seven. So you gotta scroll or flip.

One of seven, okay, here.

From the back. Oh, from the back. Yeah, it's toward the end. That first one is very lengthy. Oh, okay, there we go.

So it's page one of seven of policy 6465.

So Ms. Santos, for the record, could you repeat exactly which sentence you're referring to now that I think everybody has page one of seven up in front of them?

Thank you, Mr. Chair, yes. I'm glad we're all on the page now. So the first paragraph of Policy 6465, the first sentence is totally fine with the edits that are being proposed. So I don't propose any changes to that first sentence. However, that second sentence says, We are completely striking out and I can read it again. It is a very simple, but I think important statement about removing barriers to business which we all have discussed in one way or another and Actually, many of you my colleagues have taken action to remove barriers to business with the district. We've all voted in favor of it and and I wanted to have a conversation and Mr. Attorney explained to me, Walter Harvey, that we could, because it is final reading, if we all agree with the other two policies and agree to have a discussion on this one, simply move forward with the other two policies and bring back policy 6465 next meeting to be able to have that further discussion since we're not able to just, unlike other items, vote on an amendment and simply move forward since it's a policy.

Do we have any comments from the board?

Yes, just through the chair, can Mr. Harvey clarify the statement that Board Member Santos made that if there is a change in the course of final reading, what are the implications as it relates to resetting the entire process, just so he could state it for the record? Through the chair, thank you.

Yes, through the chair. Policy 6465 that she's referring to, that policy would have to be basically withdrawn from this agenda, and it would have to come back to the next meeting for initial reading. Right, start back over. The other policies can, if the board has no objections, which is policy 6320.02 and policy 6320.06, those policies can go forward if there's no objections from the board. And then we could just pull policy 6465 if the board wants we could pull that and have that considered at the next meeting. But I'd like the board to take a vote on it. At least give me some consensus.

So for clarity, Mr. Harvey, could you share with us which language would be repealed or brought back onto there from a legal standpoint that would be legally appropriate? All of it? Yes.

Yes, she what she's proposing is bringing back the entire First right through to be clear.

I'm not Mr. Chair. I just want to be super clear. The first sentence is fine as it is It is just bringing back that second sentence And to be clear, all we can decide on today is to bring it back. We can't actually amend because it's final reading. So that's why I'm asking, and I mean, I wanted to give a chance for discussion, but really, I would like to, once discussion is through, to make a motion, if there's a second, to simply bifurcate these so we can vote on the other policies, move them forward, and just have at the next meeting space to discuss this policy.

Dr. Gallin, you're recognized.

Yes. Through the chair, I understand the spirit of wanting to have this reflected, but I also understand the intent as it relates to why this has been done. So final reading at this particular point for me gives me some degree of consternation. And let me just cut to the chase. We know... the landscape we're in right now. We know why some of these amendments are being made. We know through the chair how some of these notions, I call them ideas because sometimes they don't reflect the reality, but we understand the implications of the fact that some of these words matter. And this is just the landscape that we're in right now. through the chair as much as I'm always inclined to support my colleagues, I do understand that we have some serious consideration as it relates to some of the things that have happened at the national and state level as it relates to certain policies reflecting certain language that has consequences for certain things. Those are my thoughts. We know, and I can go on and on, we know that Decisions at the highest level of government have been made through word searches. As insidious, in my words, asinine as that may be, this is the landscape that we're in. And that's my reluctance in terms of wanting to address that. The timeline notwithstanding, But those are my thoughts, and I think you teed it up to get some thoughts around that. Now it's out there, and I'm sure that this could be further examined. I do appreciate the attorney's office for being very proactive in light of what has been coming down the pike in terms of trying to navigate us through these issues. CHALLENGING AND UNFORTUNATE TIMES BECAUSE THESE TOPICS AND ISSUES HAVE NEVER HAD TO RESONATE IN OUR POLICY POSITIONS, LET ALONE OUR PRACTICES. BUT THROUGH THE CHAIR, THIS IS KIND OF WHERE WE ARE. SO THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS AROUND THAT. IF IT WAS MATERIAL IN THIS REGARD AND IT DID NOT CREATE POTENTIAL EXPOSURE, I would say the words wouldn't matter. And I'm the person that said a couple of years ago, words matter. I never thought that it would mean as much as it does now, but words matter for better or for worse. And I do appreciate and respect this being in final reading where it is right now to at least have this particular policy position and this potential issue of exposure resolved and disposed of as quickly as we can at this point, respectfully through the chair.

Thank you, Dr. Gallin. Any further questions? And I agree with Dr. Gallin, and something that Mr. Harvey and I have spoken about in certain times when things come up, and I think it's important that we do this, and I applaud our legal team for doing a great job. You know, making sure that we can continue serving our students, which is the most important thing, and the last thing we want to do is get into any. unneeded. Discussions when we're our true focuses and our students here, but with that we always have an option, so we did have a possible motion to this discussion. Does anybody want to entertain a second in exploring this?

I don't think she made a formal motion.

Yeah, and Mr. Chair, right before that motion, if I could just close out my discussion. I want to be clear that there are many other parts of this policy which I'm not addressing, which may address what, I'll quote Dr. Gallin, he stated as insidious or other efforts, which my colleagues are maybe now referencing as what we must do. That I am no fool to. I completely understand that. And have, you know, as much as I may disagree, understand, and that is, for example, why sentence one, I would not change. And I'll just put on the record, sentence one changes the words diversity, equity, and inclusion to equal access and opportunity. Again, you can call it whatever you want. As long as we're serving our students and we're serving our community, I'm fine with that. What I am saying is in this policy, and it might have been a simple overlooking of something, but I think in removing that second sentence, we went above and beyond something that frankly doesn't even really address diversity, equity, access, or inclusion. It addresses removing barriers to business. And I think we just went above and beyond what we needed to do to be responsible in the clear, responsive to these times. and I did not catch that the first time, and I understand it's final reading. I'm putting it on the record. Again, I don't believe it is incredibly consequential. I needed for my conscience to be able to put that on the record and ask for a second to a motion. I see that there is no will right now to do that, and so I can vote on the item as I'd like. I've made my record clear of why And so I will vote accordingly at the board meeting. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much. And I think we had already voted, so we don't have to go back then and vote on anything. I did have another new business, and it was something I discussed with Mr. Harvey and our legal team regarding our organizational meeting that is scheduled for Tuesday, November 18th. That's actually the day before our board meeting, which is on the 19th. I do understand that in years when we have elections, we have ceremonies and so on that we want to have a special day for that. But in an effort to create further efficiencies, there was a discussion and Mr. Harvey explained to me that it is legally allowed for our board to do our organizational meeting right before our regularly scheduled school board meeting and would save us the hour and a half drive to downtown Miami for some of us if we just had it right before our meeting. So I wanted to just have it as a discussion point amongst the board to see What the thoughts were, if the board was open to it, then I think there would need to be a board item that would be brought back to discuss it and to vote on. But before I even brought a board item, I wanted to have it as a discussion with the board to see what everybody thought about it, if we thought it was a good move or none. So I'll leave it open now for any comments.

I would greatly be in favor.

Yes, Board Chair Ross.

Given the fact that one of the elected officials that is up for, like those of us that are here that are up for re-election is not present, I think that this conversation needs to take place when she is also present to give her input. I'll put this for this.

There is no elections in this cycle.

Oh, for this year only? This year. Oh, okay.

There will be several of us on the following one that may want a ceremony. Oh, okay. Then we're good. There are no swearing-ins. For this meeting, there are no swearing-ins.

Then we're good.

Definitely. I wouldn't have even brought it up if it wasn't that there is that. But since there's no swearing-in ceremonies, it should just be a few minutes of a meeting, and then we can go into our regular schedule meeting. Okay. So I'll work on it with Mr. Harvey, and I appreciate everybody's feedback in being able to have that. With that, this exhausts the agenda. If there's no further items to discuss, I adjourn today's committee meeting.