Updates on the Fight for Quality Public Education in Brevard County, FL
0:00 (upbeat music)
0:30 (upbeat music continues)
2:38 (upbeat music)
3:00 (upbeat music continues)
3:08 - Good afternoon.
3:09 The September 10, 2020 policy work session
3:12 to discuss policy 8420.02,
3:15 emergency policy requiring face coverings is now in session.
3:19 The emergency policy became effective on August 11, 2020
3:23 and is being revised so that it can remain in effect
3:25 after its initial 90 days have expired
3:28 and to be in compliance with applicable Florida law.
3:31 Pam, roll call, please.
3:33 - Mrs. Belford.
3:34 - Present.
3:35 - Mrs. Campbell.
3:37 - Present.
3:38 - Mrs. Deskevich.
3:39 - Present.
3:40 - Ms. McDougall.
3:41 - Present.
3:41 - And Mr. Susan.
3:42 - Present.
3:43 - Thank you.
3:44 We will now say the pledge of allegiance.
3:48 - Pledge allegiance to the flag
3:50 of the United States of America
3:53 and to the Republic for which it stands,
3:55 one Nation under God, indivisible,
3:58 with liberty and justice for all.
4:04 - Robin Novelli, Chief Operating Officer,
4:06 will provide us the executive summary on the policy.
4:09 Mr. Novelli.
4:11 - Thank you, Ms. Belford.
4:13 (indistinct)
4:15 I believe Paul Gibbs may be here also virtually.
4:18 Paul, are you there?
4:20 - I am.
4:21 - All right, very good.
4:22 So glad to have you in the background.
4:26 I passed out to each of the board members
4:27 a hard copy of the policy.
4:30 And as Ms. Belford had already said,
4:33 this policy was adopted by the school board
4:35 on August the 11th as an emergency board policy
4:38 due to the current coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic.
4:43 And that the superintendent found that it is,
4:46 there is an eminent danger and a need
4:48 to protect public health, safety,
4:50 and or welfare posed by the COVID-19.
4:53 The emergency policy as adopted governs
4:56 the conduct of staff, students, visitors,
4:58 and vendors in the district facility.
5:01 And so the point here is to make
5:05 what was a temporary emergency permanent
5:09 before the 90 day period is conclusion.
5:14 So this is a little different
5:15 than what we normally do with policies.
5:18 So what we’ve done this time is we’ve listed
5:21 as the current version, the actual emergency policy.
5:24 And so you’ll find that in your packet
5:27 is the first part of that,
5:29 the way the emergency policy was written.
5:31 We have that listed as the current.
5:33 And then you’ll see Neola’s template
5:36 for that information there.
5:39 And then if you go on to the red line version,
5:43 what you’ll see is that there have been
5:46 a number of things that have been taken out
5:50 that no longer applicable since it’s no longer temporary
5:53 and few additions that were added.
5:59 Juanita also took the opportunity
6:01 to make this like the other policies
6:03 that we have updated recently
6:05 and put in the outlining format
6:07 so that we can refer to paragraphs easily.
6:10 And you’ll see in paragraph G,
6:11 there was some input there.
6:12 It’s actually highlighted as well as underlined
6:15 for those parts that were stricken.
6:21 And that part was provided by cabinet
6:24 as a slight addition to some information about face shields.
6:30 And then after that, you’ll see a clean version
6:32 of the proposed policy.
6:34 This is a work session and whatever other input
6:38 that you have, we’ll make those changes
6:40 for the next time around at the workshop.
6:46 - Thank you, Mr. Novelli.
6:49 Any board members have questions, comments, requests?
6:54 Ms. Campbell.
6:56 - So first of all, just because for those who are watching,
7:00 I don’t want people to get the idea
7:01 because you just said the word permanent.
7:03 That means we’re making facial coverings permanent,
7:06 but we are having a permanent policy to deal with
7:10 when we need to have temporary use of face coverings.
7:12 - Excellent point.
7:13 That choice of words on my part.
7:14 - That’s right, that’s right.
7:16 - Because if you see it towards the end of that,
7:18 there’s language about how the superintendent
7:20 and or board would conclude that type of a policy
7:27 if it had to be put again in place.
7:31 - So the one point in here that I would love for us to,
7:37 maybe I could get some clarification on why
7:40 we’re using this particular wording,
7:41 or maybe we can make it a little clearer is in,
7:44 let me get my letters right.
7:45 F, F1C, all student face covering shall comply
7:53 with the school’s dress code for shirts.
7:55 I’ve already seen that come up in a few emails or concerns.
8:00 And I understand the idea behind it is
8:03 that if we have a rule that you can’t have a shirt
8:05 that says, that advertises drugs, alcohol, cigarettes,
8:10 whatever, then you also can’t have a face mask
8:11 or if it has obscenity.
8:13 But I think that’s maybe a little confusing.
8:16 I think maybe we can, if we could we be more clear with that
8:19 or because the other thing is some schools
8:21 are like our district dress code doesn’t say shirts,
8:23 it says upper garments, but we also have that you’re like,
8:26 you can’t wear pants with that on there either.
8:28 So I’m just not sure if that’s the right wording for that.
8:31 - And I had a note to bring that up to Ms. Campbell.
8:33 So thank you for calling attention to that.
8:36 I looked at our student code of conduct this morning,
8:38 and actually it is the accessories portion
8:40 of our student code of conduct that addresses
8:43 any inappropriate advertising statements,
8:46 those sorts of things.
8:47 So I think if we, with the school’s dress code
8:51 for accessories, I think would actually incorporate
8:54 the language that we’re meaning to incorporate.
8:56 - Right. - Okay.
8:58 - Because if the point is that the wording
9:01 or the imagery that’s on, it’s the way that it looks,
9:05 it’s not a matter of how thick the straps are
9:08 or anything like that that would relate to–
9:10 - Good point.
9:12 Well, then we’ll go back and study those exact words
9:15 in the student conduct and we’ll use the same wording here.
9:18 - Perfect, thank you, Mr. Novelli.
9:21 Any other board members have any other items to discuss
9:24 on the policy language?
9:28 - I have just a couple.
9:33 And this might actually be a question for Mr. Gibbs,
9:35 but on item C, it says that the superintendent
9:41 working with the DOH may activate the policy
9:43 by notifying the school community of the implementation.
9:46 And then he will place the measure
9:48 on the next available board meeting agenda.
9:49 So my question is, does that mean that activation
9:51 of the policy is pending board approval
9:54 or can the superintendent go ahead and activate the policy?
9:58 Kind of like when we hire, right?
10:00 We put people into their position
10:02 and then the board doesn’t approve them until later.
10:06 - Right, yeah, the intent was that if in conjunction
10:09 with the DOH, they say we need the policy in place,
10:13 he can activate it immediately.
10:14 And then he brings it to the next meeting
10:17 for board approval to continue it.
10:20 - So can we stick in immediately
10:23 after may activate this policy?
10:26 - Yeah.
10:27 - I just don’t want it to be perceived
10:28 that the superintendent has to bring it to the board
10:30 before we can put it in place,
10:31 if it’s in the best interest of our students
10:33 to go ahead and do that.
10:35 - Right, I will certainly stick it in there.
10:37 I’ll add the word immediately after may activate.
10:42 - We’re after the word policy.
10:44 - Yeah, may activate this policy immediately
10:46 by notifying, yep.
10:48 - Okay, perfect.
10:49 And then on item G,
10:54 I love that we are clarifying that face shield
10:56 should not be used in lieu of masks,
10:59 except in situations where instruction
11:02 it’s needed for effective instruction, I guess.
11:06 But I’m wondering if it would not be more efficient
11:10 for us to say face shields may be used by persons
11:12 to comply with this policy
11:16 when the instruction requires the ability
11:19 to see the face of the student and or teacher.
11:24 ‘Cause I think the current confusion around face shields
11:27 is that first sentence.
11:31 Does that make sense?
11:33 - All right, so you said when the instruction requires.
11:38 - The ability to see like the rest of that last sentence,
11:42 the ability to see the face of the student and or teacher.
11:48 - So are you saying you don’t want to include
11:50 the first sentence, you don’t want to allow face shields
11:52 to be used to comply with this policy?
11:57 - Yeah, so the point of the face shields act technically
12:02 can be used as an accommodation for someone
12:04 who has medical restriction as well, right?
12:07 But the perception just because people see
12:11 this first sentence is I just don’t feel like wearing a mask
12:15 and so I’m just gonna wear a face shield.
12:18 And I think that’s where a lot of the confusion
12:21 has come from because we know that masks
12:23 do not provide the same level of protection.
12:25 They mask provided different, I’m sorry,
12:28 face shields provide a different level of protection.
12:30 So face shields provide additional protection
12:32 for the person wearing them to provide eye protection,
12:35 but they are not as effective at stopping droplet spread.
12:38 So ideally you wear a face mask for your protection
12:42 to keep your eyes and you wear a mask
12:44 to prevent spread to others.
12:46 And I think there’s been an enormous amount of confusion
12:48 around that portion of the policy.
12:55 - So are you just striking the very first sentence?
13:06 - My, I mean, we certainly, we can talk about it.
13:08 My recommendation would be to take the part
13:12 of the first sentence and part of the second sentence.
13:14 So in the first sentence, face shields may be used
13:16 by persons to comply with this policy
13:20 and then move down to the second sentence
13:22 when the instruction,
13:24 and I’m not sure why we have supports.
13:28 It seems like requires would be more appropriate,
13:31 the ability to see the face of the student
13:33 and or the teacher.
13:35 So we’re actually taking out the first part
13:37 of the second sentence.
13:44 (indistinct)
13:55 - Was her proposed change.
13:59 - Yeah, I think she was proposing the change
14:01 to clear up that confusion
14:02 because I know we’ve gotten a lot of feedback on that.
14:11 » So I’m just thinking about current practice.
14:15 I mean, I have an elementary school student right now who –
14:21 we provided face shields for every elementary school student
14:25 up through sixth grade so that they can use –
14:30 and he uses his interchange – I mean, he has his mask.
14:32 He gets on with the mask, but he has a shield, and he can use
14:34 that in certain circumstances throughout the day,
14:37 and he just kind of swaps them out as needed.
14:40 You know, face shields, I understand and agree.
14:47 You know, it’s a different kind of protection, but I –
14:50 you know, when I – what I’ve heard from even some
14:53 of our pediatric infectious disease specialists overall,
14:55 and then where’s the one who did the presentation that –
14:58 for the school nurses in Orange County, you talked about,
15:01 you know, we have to look at good, better, best.
15:04 I think about some of our primary students whose parents
15:06 who we have said, right, it’s strongly encouraged.
15:09 It’s not the same requirement for our pre-K
15:12 through second grade students,
15:14 but some of them are using face shields because they’re –
15:17 at a young age, it’s easier for –
15:19 something easier for them to do.
15:21 If we take this out, we – I don’t know, I kind of like the way
15:28 that it is because we’re able to –
15:31 we’re able to make it a broader –
15:37 it’s giving more people the ability to comply with the policy
15:40 who are having a hard time with it, just to be completely honest.
15:44 » So I think the – I understand where you’re coming from.
15:49 I think it’s confusing to say that they meet the requirement
15:54 and then they only meet the requirement in this situation,
15:57 because that’s basically what it says, is they’re allowed
16:00 to be warned when instruction warrants it, right?
16:03 So if they’re receiving speech therapy or if they’re working
16:05 on phonics or if they’re working on any of those things,
16:08 that’s what the second sentence says, basically.
16:11 » Okay.
16:12 » But I think the confusion is coming in with the first
16:15 sentence.
16:15 So our primary kids who are pre-K to 2,
16:21 we have just a strong recommendation for them.
16:23 For 3 through 6, if it’s instructionally warranted
16:28 for them to do the shields, absolutely.
16:29 I think – I don’t – I personally don’t see
16:32 that we’re really changing the –
16:35 yeah, I don’t think we’re changing practice.
16:37 I think we’re just clearing up confusion.
16:40 » Okay.
16:41 » Because we have – I’ll tell you, we have a lot of teachers
16:44 that are walking around just wearing face shields.
16:47 And that, I think, is concerning unless it’s an accommodation.
16:59 » So the cloth section isn’t clear on the level of cloth.
17:04 I mean, if we’re going to start getting
17:07 down to the nitty-gritty and micromanaging,
17:09 we’ve got people using Spandex over their face.
17:14 I mean, if you really want to be severe, I’m willing to bet
17:20 that Spandex is doing less than a face shield.
17:23 And yet, we’re not going to get into the nitty-gritty
17:26 and say what kind of cloth you need.
17:28 So it just – so much of this doesn’t make sense to me.
17:31 It’s like we grab this.
17:33 We grab that.
17:34 We don’t care about this.
17:35 So we feel like we’re doing something.
17:36 If we care, we care.
17:38 If we don’t, we don’t.
17:39 And if we’re now going to – the few people that are left and
17:42 able
17:42 to deal with this by using a face shield
17:44 to calm their anxieties, we’re now going to say no,
17:46 you have to have something touching your face,
17:48 which may do less than the face shield
17:50 because it makes somebody else feel better.
17:52 Super frustrating to me.
17:56 » So I get your frustration, Ms. Duskovich, and I –
17:58 you know, I would just remind that we’ve got –
18:00 we still have the exceptions
18:03 where people can certainly wear a face shield
18:04 if they are more comfortable with that.
18:06 And they have – you know, documented as exceptions.
18:10 All of – I mean, there are A through I of exceptions there.
18:16 So I don’t think, at least – and it’s not my interpretation.
18:22 If someone else has a different interpretation,
18:24 I certainly would love to hear.
18:26 I don’t think that G applies excluding the exceptions.
18:36 So I don’t think that G is saying, well,
18:37 even though you have an exception,
18:39 you have to follow this.
18:40 The exceptions are there.
18:42 But where we have an enormous amount
18:43 of confusion is the expectation that people wear masks except
18:50 when the instructional need is there for them to be able
18:54 to see mouth or if the exceptions are there
18:57 for medical, psychological,
18:59 all of those issues I think still apply.
19:04 » So we don’t include just –
19:06 we don’t include face shields in F, which is the types
19:09 of face coverings.
19:10 But then we have G that says, oh, and you can have these too.
19:13 So I get why it’s confusing.
19:15 Paul, you have any –
19:20 » My – what I recall from the emergency adoption hearings
19:28 on this policy is that the majority
19:32 of the board wanted to allow face shields.
19:35 That’s why it was worded the way it was.
19:38 Because if you look at – if you take the red line out,
19:40 we were saying faculty are encouraged to use a face shield
19:44 and move a mask when instruction required the students
19:49 to see the teacher’s face.
19:51 So that was kind of the exception for masks for teachers.
19:56 The rest of it, from what I recall, was we were okay
19:59 with students being able to wear face shields to comply.
20:03 If the board wants to change it to say we don’t want
20:06 to allow face shields to comply with it unless
20:09 that circumstance is there, then that’s fine.
20:12 It’s up to the board.
20:13 It’s your policy.
20:14 So this is going to be here long term.
20:17 If it ever crops up or another illness comes out and we need
20:20 to impose it, this is what we’re going to be using.
20:24 » And without getting too much in the weeds,
20:26 let me give you another example of a time
20:27 when the face shields are being used.
20:29 On our playground, sometimes outside,
20:31 the kids are using the face shields instead of a mask.
20:34 Personally, I don’t have a problem with that
20:35 because we’re outdoors.
20:36 It’s frustrating for many parents that they have
20:38 to be wearing them at all when it’s so hot
20:40 and they’re outdoors and they’re socially distanced.
20:42 And so schools are doing different things depending
20:45 on how socially distanced they are.
20:47 But some of them are going ahead and using a face shield
20:50 because then it’s – at least you’re not quite so sweaty.
20:52 You still have some air circulation,
20:53 but you’ve got something on.
20:55 That, if we take this first sentence out or we change it,
20:59 then we’re not allowing that anymore.
21:01 So just because that wouldn’t – there’s not really an ability
21:06 –
21:06 there’s not necessarily an instructional reason
21:09 to have a face shield on at the time.
21:11 You’re out on the playground.
21:11 There’s not instruction necessarily going on unless you’re in PE.
21:16 So –
21:18 » I don’t think, though, Ms. Campbell, that the policy reads
21:21 that if they are outside and socially distanced,
21:26 they’re not required to have a mask.
21:28 So I would suggest that if they’re outside
21:30 and socially distanced and they have them wear a face shield,
21:34 they’re just taking an extra layer of protection.
21:35 I don’t think we’re prohibiting them from using face shields
21:38 in that situation if they are socially distanced.
21:49 » Do we have something specifically describing what
21:53 you just mentioned?
21:53 Because I don’t see an exception.
21:55 Obviously, our policy just in general says
21:57 when you can’t maintain social – or when you can maintain –
22:00 you know, that you have to wear a face covering
22:02 when you can’t maintain social distancing
22:04 or as much as feasible, right?
22:06 But we do have schools that have –
22:10 they may be changing those with a greater understanding
22:13 of the policy, but we do have schools
22:14 that are requiring their kids to keep their face coverings
22:16 on when they go out on the playground.
22:22 » Well, we talk about strenuous physical activity.
22:26 Shall not be required for any –
22:27 » Hang on, Ms. –
22:28 » Inside or outside.
22:29 » Is your mic on?
22:30 » No, it’s not on.
22:32 So we do talk about strenuous physical activity.
22:35 A face covering shall not be required for any person inside
22:37 or outside of any school district facility while such
22:39 persons engage in strenuous physical activity,
22:43 which would be recess, quite frankly,
22:44 because they run around.
22:46 So, yeah. So it’s not required.
22:50 So – and that’s in our emergency policy.
22:52 I’m assuming it’s in this current policy, too.
22:54 » It is. It’s in there, E1H.
23:05 » So I have a question.
23:13 Are we concerned that people are abusing this?
23:15 Is that what your concern is?
23:17 Because I think that – I agree with Ms. Campbell with,
23:21 I’d rather have some people use a face shield than nothing.
23:27 And if that makes them more comfortable, our students,
23:31 it doesn’t give them the best protection.
23:33 It really – they’re more vulnerable.
23:37 But I do feel that it allows them that choice.
23:41 » I’m not – I’m not concerned that people are abusing it.
23:44 I’m concerned that people don’t understand the difference
23:48 in the level of protection.
23:51 And as I said, there are – I’ve gotten multiple emails
23:58 from teachers who are concerned
23:59 that their peers are just wearing a face shield throughout
24:03 the day in all interactions.
24:05 And they’re concerned for their own safety.
24:09 So I think just making sure that, you know, yes,
24:13 there are times when it’s appropriate.
24:14 If you’re utilizing the face shield as an accommodation,
24:17 if you’re utilizing a face shield while you’re working
24:18 on instruction, you know, that speech therapy or you need
24:23 to see phonics, letter sounds, those types of things,
24:27 I think that at least my –
24:29 was my understanding of the original intent
24:31 on the face shields was there are times
24:33 when it’s appropriate, but not that it necessarily be used
24:37 in lieu of masks all the time.
24:42 » And that’s true because I know we talked about being able
24:45 to purchase masks that had the clear face –
24:50 face so people could read other people’s lips.
24:55 » Yeah. So I don’t want to take anything away.
25:01 I mean, like I said, we have the exceptions.
25:04 We have, you know, the –
25:06 I just think it’s incredibly confusing as it’s worded.
25:15 » If it needs to be more clear, we can make it more clear.
25:17 But I would not be in favor of making it more restrictive.
25:23 » So is it your perception that that is making it more
25:27 restrictive by taking out –
25:29 by blending the first and second sense?
25:34 » Yes.
25:41 » I do understand your confusion on the words
25:43 of the support because I –
25:45 seems like it’s the other way around.
25:47 » Right.
25:47 » When it needs to be supported by having a face shield.
25:55 Maybe that’s just not the same way I use that word.
25:58 But no, I – go ahead.
26:01 » I would agree that if we combine those two sentences,
26:05 it would be a restrictive use of face shields
26:08 where you can only use them when you’re doing that activity
26:13 that requires the ability to see the face.
26:20 » Paul, do you know what the origin of the supports –
26:24 when the instruction supports the ability to see?
26:28 Because I think that was –
26:30 » The red line stuff came from Ms. Klein.
26:32 » Okay.
26:32 » She redlined all that in there.
26:34 If you take that out, that was the original.
26:36 I cut and pasted our original emergency
26:39 in under Neola’s opening paragraph.
26:42 The first three there at the top, ABC, are Neola’s.
26:47 I tweaked it a little bit.
26:49 But starting with D is the meat of our emergency policy.
26:55 » Okay.
26:59 » All right.
27:03 So is it consensus from the board then to keep it as it is
27:07 and just change supports to requires?
27:16 » Play that again.
27:18 » To change when the instruction supports the ability
27:21 to see, to change when the instruction requires the
27:23 ability to see.
27:25 » I like that better.
27:27 » Yeah, that makes more sense.
27:34 » Anyone else want to weigh in?
27:45 » Okay.
27:46 » So we’re going to change the word supports to requires
27:49 and leave everything else as it is?
27:50 » Yes, for that item G.
27:58 » Okay.
28:00 » Good.
28:00 » Anything else?
28:02 » Anyone else have anything else?
28:04 » All right.
28:06 Hearing no further discussion, the workshop is now adjourned.