Updates on the Fight for Quality Public Education in Brevard County, FL
0:00 (upbeat music)
0:30 (upbeat music continues)
5:33 - Good morning.
5:34 The September 12th, 2023 board work session is now in order.
5:37 Paul roll call, please.
5:38 - Mr. Susan.
5:39 - Here.
5:40 - Ms. Wright.
5:41 - Here.
5:41 - Mr. Trent.
5:42 - Here.
5:43 - Ms. Campbell.
5:44 - Here.
5:45 - Ms. Jenkins.
5:46 - Here.
5:46 - Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
5:50 - I pledge allegiance to the flag
5:52 of the United States of America
5:54 and to the Republic for which it stands,
5:57 one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty
6:00 and justice for all.
6:03 - Thank you for everybody that’s watching today.
6:06 We’ve got a 7,000 policy review.
6:08 We added a public speaking discussion afterwards.
6:11 And then any quick board comments,
6:14 wanted the board to know that Dr. Rendell moved forward,
6:16 which was much needed in allowing staff to get ahead
6:20 of our policies because, you know,
6:23 they’re the ultimately the ones that make the recommendations
6:25 and stuff like that.
6:26 And if we have anything to add.
6:28 So Dr. Rendell had our three individuals
6:30 that head up the departments for each one of them
6:33 that we’re covering today.
6:34 So the process is gonna go that I’m going to read
6:37 the actual policy, ask Dr. Rendell if he has anything
6:41 to add, and then if we have anything to add for them,
6:43 then we’re gonna move on to the next one,
6:45 if that’s okay with you guys.
6:47 Okay.
6:47 - Yeah, my password is making me reset,
6:51 like at this very moment.
6:54 - So you need a minute?
6:55 - No, we’re good, just keep going.
6:58 I have my notes.
6:59 - Okay.
7:00 - I’ll work on that.
7:01 - Okay.
7:02 So the first policy is gonna be 7100 facilities planning.
7:06 BPS has a current policy.
7:08 NEOLA has a separate update.
7:12 Facilities recommendation, Dr. Rendell.
7:16 - Thank you, Mr. Chair.
7:17 I’m gonna have Ms. Han respond to the next few of these.
7:21 And we don’t have this process perfected.
7:23 We don’t necessarily have a recommendation
7:25 for each policy that’s on the list,
7:27 but for many of them, we do.
7:29 So we’re gonna give you the recommendations that we have
7:32 for the ones that we do have recommendations for.
7:34 So Sue.
7:36 - Yes, thank you, sir.
7:37 For 7100, we would recommend that the board refer that
7:40 to staff for some analysis and updating.
7:42 We did update the administrative procedure in 2022.
7:46 That was a detailed guide for the development
7:48 of the student combination plan, and that’s working fine.
7:51 But the policy language may want to look at some
7:55 of the language in NEOLA as well as introduce some language
7:58 around charter and choice and how those play
8:00 into facilities planning.
8:02 So I’d like an opportunity to look
8:04 on at this one a little bit.
8:06 - So the recommendation is to allow staff to look it over
8:09 and then bring it back to us.
8:10 Does anybody else from the board wish to make any comments?
8:13 Also would like to recommend that if you feel
8:15 like you have something that you may have missed
8:17 or something like that, please feel free to reach out
8:20 to Miss Sue Hand during the process of her review
8:23 after we leave the meeting today.
8:24 If you feel like you have to say something,
8:26 that would be good too.
8:27 So at this point, does anybody else wish
8:29 to speak about 7100?
8:31 - Yeah, just briefly.
8:32 I noticed in letter B, you wanna talk about the microphone?
8:35 Oh, yeah.
8:36 And it says that you’ll report to the board
8:40 on the enrollment by grades during the school year monthly.
8:43 I think we, or we used to get updates.
8:47 I can’t remember what they’re called, but we get email.
8:49 But it’s not broken down by grades.
8:51 So maybe we could refine that language
8:53 ‘cause I don’t really need to know every month
8:56 how many fifth graders, how many fourth graders,
8:57 but more along the lines of the students count.
9:01 That’s not the name of the document,
9:03 but that we get maybe make that more along the lines
9:06 of what we’re actually doing.
9:07 It does break it down regionally and by grade bands
9:12 or elementary, middle, all that.
9:14 But I don’t wanna put something in policy
9:17 that we’re not holding everybody to
9:18 or would want to hold everybody to.
9:20 - Yeah, I’d be happy to do that.
9:22 And then the other thing I wanted to look at
9:23 is the state law requires us to provide information
9:29 every so often.
9:30 I feel like it’s monthly about the number
9:33 of available seats in each grade
9:35 that has to be published on our website.
9:37 So that may play into what we put into policy as well
9:40 that we at least respond to state law, which we are doing.
9:44 - If I could pull up the yellow ones in front of me,
9:46 which I will be able to in a few minutes.
9:47 I think it gave us some choices monthly
9:49 by semester or whatever.
9:50 I’m cool with semester or whatever.
9:54 - All good.
9:54 Anybody else wish to comment?
9:56 Okay, rolling on to Dr. Rendell.
9:59 You got the Mr. Hand’s gonna,
10:02 how do you want me to follow up?
10:03 - She’s gonna go to all the way to 7120, 7130 actually.
10:07 - And you’d like me, you need me after every meeting,
10:10 after every one to kind of mention,
10:12 “Hey, here’s what I heard.”
10:13 Or do you feel like you’re comfortable about-
10:15 - I think we’re recording it.
10:16 So I think we’re good.
10:17 - Perfect, all right.
10:18 7101 building permits in the code enforcement office.
10:20 Dr. Rendell.
10:22 - Yep, Ms. Hand’s gonna take, like I said,
10:23 all the way to 7130.
10:26 - Okay.
10:27 - Again, we’d like you to refer this one to staff.
10:30 I would like to look at some type of a hybrid
10:32 between what BPS has and NEOLA.
10:35 We contract our building official services right now.
10:38 So I may want to broaden the language
10:40 to just is explicit about allowing for that.
10:44 I’d also wanna check the building code reference.
10:46 It’s in NEOLA, I think it’s updated.
10:48 So there’s a couple of things
10:49 that I wanted to look at with this one
10:50 and nothing major in terms of our operations,
10:54 but I do wanna have an opportunity
10:55 to have the policy reflect our actual work.
10:58 - Okay, does anybody else wish to comment on this policy?
11:02 Hearing none, we’ll move on to 7110 student accommodations.
11:06 Ms. Hand.
11:07 - Yes, 7110 as a policy, in my opinion, is fine as is.
11:13 I do think the administrative procedure,
11:16 the boundary change procedure was updated in April of 2022,
11:21 and that procedure is working well, so that’s fine.
11:24 The administrative procedures around school closures
11:28 have not been updated in some time.
11:30 We did not update on that in 2022.
11:32 I think those need to be updated,
11:35 but I wanted to go through the facility planning process
11:38 that we’re about to get started shortly,
11:40 and that would probably be part of that process.
11:44 So in terms of the policy update,
11:45 I think the policy is okay as is,
11:47 but this particular procedure does need to be updated.
11:51 - Would you like to send us the old copier?
11:53 Would you like us to wait
11:54 until you make a recommendation for a new one?
11:56 - I think you might as well wait,
11:58 ‘cause I do think that the procedure
12:00 really needs to be quite different than what it is now.
12:03 - Okay.
12:05 All right, next one up is 7110AP,
12:09 school attendance boundary procedures,
12:11 closure scope, school closure analysis.
12:13 I understand, I understand you guys.
12:15 Are we all okay with the current way
12:17 that we’re gonna do it, is this update 7110, Ms. Han?
12:20 And those will all be contained inside of there?
12:22 - Yes, so 7110, the policy I think is okay.
12:26 - Just wanna make sure I’ve got this list
12:27 I’m going through.
12:28 - Yep, so the 7110 administrative procedure is okay as is,
12:34 and 7110A and B administrative procedure needs,
12:38 both of those need to be updated.
12:40 - Okay, next one up is 7130,
12:42 implementation and management of school concurrency.
12:45 Ms. Han.
12:46 - This is solely a Brevard policy,
12:48 there’s no Neola reference,
12:49 because this is a reflection of our interlocal agreement
12:52 and defines how we do school concurrency.
12:54 This is based on our interlocal agreement
12:56 and our opinion is it’s fine as is.
12:59 - Yeah, and there’s a couple of administrative procedures
13:01 attached to it that we might need to update,
13:02 so I wanted to say thank you.
13:04 Is there anybody here that wishes to speak to 7130?
13:07 No, okay.
13:09 Next up is gonna be 7217, weapons.
13:14 Dr. Rendell.
13:15 - Yeah, so we would like you to refer that to staff,
13:18 both 7217 and the subsequent sections.
13:23 We have the chief of schools and student services
13:25 reviewing this right now.
13:26 - Okay, and you said subsequent sections,
13:28 would that be the next one, which is 7230,
13:30 or is that subsequent sections just being 7217?
13:34 - Oh, the 7217.
13:35 - Okay, is there anybody that wishes to speak
13:37 to the weapons 7217?
13:39 - Yeah, that one had not only July updates,
13:41 but also a September update that Ron had just sent us,
13:45 so we’ll make sure we incorporate all that in there.
13:47 - Yep, we’re good.
13:49 All right, next one up is 7230, gifts, grants and requests.
13:54 Dr. Rendell.
13:55 - So human resources is looking at that,
13:57 so we’d like to refer it to staff
13:59 and we’ll give you something back.
14:00 - Okay, does anybody wish to speak to 7230?
14:05 - I like ours.
14:06 - Okay.
14:07 - Oh, I did have on this, I think it’s this one.
14:11 There is a section that, I think it’s on,
14:16 I just don’t have it close enough, here we go.
14:18 Thank you.
14:19 There’s a section that says,
14:20 it talks about the grant procedures,
14:22 and I was trying to find that.
14:24 It’s actually in Administrative Procedure 6111,
14:29 so if we can maybe, if we’re going back into it,
14:32 if we can hot link that.
14:33 And then we also have 9230, which is the same thing.
14:40 So when we do ‘em, maybe we have one or the other,
14:45 or make them match at least, so that we’re not,
14:49 ‘cause from what I can tell, they’re just about the same.
14:52 - Yeah, and Miss Lazinski corrected me, she’s got this one.
14:55 - Okay.
14:56 - And so.
14:57 - Go ahead, Miss Lazinski.
15:01 - Miss Campbell, I agree with you.
15:03 There are like three different policies
15:05 that kind of reach out to the different areas,
15:08 and what we wanna do is to be able to take a look at ‘em,
15:13 and make sure that it makes sense in the policies in there.
15:16 The biggest thing is to make sure PTOs, and boosters,
15:20 and those understand what the rules are,
15:22 and people are taking the correct responsibility.
15:25 - I appreciate that, that’s awesome.
15:27 - Yeah, and just so everybody knows,
15:28 Dr. Rendell and I had met, and there’s a series of those
15:31 that you’re gonna run into,
15:32 where they are in multiple spots, right?
15:34 So what staff’s doing is they’ve identified
15:36 each one of ‘em, they’re in the process of saying,
15:39 hey, they’re in three different spots,
15:40 let’s pull ‘em together, where’s the appropriate place,
15:42 and everything else, so you may see more of that
15:45 as we get moving.
15:47 Okay, 7240, Dr. Rendell.
15:51 - Yes, we’re gonna go back to Miss Hand for a little while.
15:54 (laughing)
15:55 - 7240, I looked at that, and in my opinion,
15:58 that’s fine as is.
16:00 - Is there anybody here that wishes to add anything
16:03 to 7240 site acquisition?
16:07 - There was a place, I just had a question.
16:11 Sorry, I’m behind on my clicking.
16:13 There is a part that Paul that says,
16:16 talks about an executive session,
16:18 discussion of possible school sites
16:19 may be carried on an executive session, is that?
16:23 Is it because it’s a legal meeting?
16:27 - The rationale would be because if it gets out publicly,
16:31 that the board may be looking at some sites
16:33 that could jeopardize, I guess, a fair negotiation process,
16:40 ‘cause now there’s gonna be increased demand.
16:41 I would have to double check to make sure
16:43 that that exemption still is there.
16:46 - Right, I mean, NEOLA still has it in there,
16:47 but it was just kind of one of those things that triggered,
16:50 I was like, wait a minute, that’s not one of those things
16:51 you do your training of what you can’t–
16:52 - They haven’t updated there since 2002,
16:55 so I’m assuming it’s still there,
16:56 but those are set to sunset every five years,
16:59 so I would wanna double check and make sure it didn’t sunset.
17:02 So that was my question, other than that, it’s fine.
17:06 - Okay, anybody else in reference to the policy?
17:12 Okay, next up is going to be 7250,
17:17 commemoration of school facilities.
17:21 - Yes, sir, that had a substantial upgrade in June of 2022,
17:24 and we’re pretty satisfied with the way that’s working.
17:27 May address the reference to leading and learning,
17:32 but other than that, the procedural aspects
17:34 of the policy are fine.
17:36 - There was some reference recently, okay, I’m sorry,
17:38 did you have anything else?
17:40 Did anybody else have anything to say on this topic?
17:43 - No, ours is more detailed, so I prefer ours.
17:46 - There was some concern wrapped around a couple
17:48 of the policies in saying that once you named a facility,
17:52 you were not allowed to name another facility
17:54 for five years inside of your school.
17:56 Is that anywhere that you see?
17:58 Because that came to me from one of our principals
18:01 that was trying to rename something.
18:03 Are you seeing that, did you see that anywhere?
18:05 Like if I named my library, I can’t name another facility
18:07 for five years inside of my school.
18:08 - Let me take a look at that, that wasn’t the intent.
18:11 - Yeah, I think that’s exactly what I think.
18:13 I think what they were trying to say is you can’t rename
18:15 the actual facility, and I think that that is the intent
18:18 of the policy, I just wanted to make sure
18:20 that we get some sort of clarification over that,
18:22 because we have a couple of schools that are trying
18:24 to name a couple of things, and we just wanna make sure
18:26 that that’s okay, anybody else on that?
18:29 - Yeah, that says schools that complete the renaming process
18:32 under this section may not be considered for renaming
18:35 for at least five calendar years, following board action.
18:38 So I think that’s just saying you can’t rename a school
18:43 within five years.
18:48 - Well, I just think that we need a little bit
18:50 of clarification on that one, and that would be good.
18:52 Next up, does anybody else wish to have anything on 7250?
18:56 Next up is 7300, property custodianship.
18:59 Ms. Han.
19:01 - I believe that may be Ms. Lisenski.
19:02 - Yeah, Ms. Lisenski’s taking that one.
19:04 - Okay.
19:07 - There you go.
19:09 - Okay, for this one, it is not an IOLA policy.
19:13 However, we do wanna make sure that we are making sure
19:17 that principals and directors are managing
19:22 and taking care of their assets and equipment,
19:26 and knowing where they are, those kind of things.
19:29 And then there’s a C and D,
19:30 which really don’t fit in here.
19:35 It talks about making sure that the lights,
19:38 and the water, and the power, and everything is there.
19:40 So I think I would like to look at moving the A and B
19:47 into another policy to make it all one,
19:52 and then work with facilities on C and D.
19:56 - This is NEOLA’s template.
19:58 - I’m sorry?
19:59 - This is a NEOLA template.
20:00 - They’re exact, they’re identical.
20:01 - Yeah, they’re the same.
20:02 We just filled in the gaps and designated–
20:04 - Oh, I’m sorry, I thought there was no, okay.
20:06 - Yep.
20:07 - So the NEOLA, I don’t know why they put those–
20:10 - Yeah, you can make changes, it’s fine.
20:12 But yeah, it is, just to clarify, it is a NEOLA template.
20:15 - Okay, thank you.
20:17 - Okay, so we’re gonna work on that one and bring it back.
20:19 - Yeah, that’s what I was gonna say, checking it out.
20:21 All right, next up is 7305, easements.
20:24 That’s mine, and I would like to recommend
20:26 that you refer that to staff.
20:28 The policy is really okay as it is,
20:30 but every once in a while we have a request for an easement
20:33 where we should be compensated for the value
20:35 of that easement, and so I’d like to potentially incorporate
20:37 some language around getting an appraisal
20:39 and getting appraised value for the value of the easement.
20:43 - Could we be putting in there also,
20:45 as far as the advertising and stuff like that that we have,
20:48 any kind of definitions for,
20:50 we run into the Department of Transportation
20:52 and some of those others.
20:53 Is this an area that we could enter into that,
20:55 or do you think that this is just specifically
20:57 for the transaction? - This is just specifically
20:58 for easements. - Okay, all right.
21:01 Okay, anybody else have anything to say on easements, 7305?
21:06 All right, next up is 7310, disposition of surplus property.
21:10 I’m assuming this goes back to Ms. Lesinski.
21:12 - Yes, that’s correct.
21:15 - This one we are very happy with,
21:17 and there’s just gonna be a couple minor changes.
21:20 - Yeah, administrative procedure updated in 2010.
21:23 I’m sure that that’s where it’s gonna go.
21:24 Does anybody else wish to speak to this policy?
21:28 - Are we at 7310? - Mm-hmm.
21:30 - We don’t have D.
21:32 We don’t have the rest of the disposition part.
21:38 Is that what you’re just saying?
21:39 Ours ends with one paragraph of disposition,
21:42 and then the NEOLA template has a lot more,
21:46 so we can incorporate those sections.
21:49 I think those are a little more specific
21:50 with how we get rid of stuff, for lack of a.
21:57 - Yeah, and I think we have a pretty strong, robust process.
22:01 I would find that if it’s not anywhere in our policies,
22:03 but did you understand what Ms. Lesinski,
22:05 what she was trying to say?
22:06 She’s just trying to say that there’s a NEOLA portion of it.
22:09 It may be in another place to deal with the disposition.
22:12 - Right, and that falls under procurement,
22:17 but we can make sure that this is all in one,
22:19 so it makes sense.
22:20 - Yeah, just like we were talking.
22:22 - Okay.
22:23 - Okay? - Mm-hmm.
22:25 - Okay, and thank you, Ms. Wright, for pointing that out.
22:28 The next one is 7320, acquisition, removal, disposition,
22:31 sale, or exchange of major tangible personal property.
22:35 Ms. Lesinski?
22:37 - So that’s actually under the chief operating officer,
22:40 chief of operations, so he’s gonna review that
22:42 and bring it back.
22:43 - Okay, anybody else wish to have anything to say
22:45 about this one policy?
22:48 - Yeah, I would like to chime in on this one.
22:49 Rashad, you know where I’m going with this one.
22:51 (laughs)
22:52 I think we received emails,
22:53 and so just making sure we tighten that thing up
22:55 so that we no longer are disposing
22:57 of something that could be used or donated.
23:00 That’s been something that the community
23:01 has been very vocal about taking pictures of,
23:03 so anything we can do to just tighten that up would be good.
23:07 Thank you, appreciate you.
23:07 - That was in 7310, though,
23:09 or that was the one that I was talking about,
23:12 that we have one paragraph on disposition,
23:15 and the NEOLA template has quite a bit more.
23:19 And that we would want to include.
23:21 This one, what I had written down was that
23:23 we don’t have that section on school memorials and gifts
23:27 that we probably need to add in there,
23:29 which would kind of be in a couple of your (laughs)
23:34 rhymes. - Yeah, it was kind of
23:35 in an earlier policy, too.
23:36 - The memorials, the gifts? - Yeah.
23:38 - Yeah, I think, blend. (laughs)
23:42 But as long as we have it in there somewhere,
23:43 ‘cause that one– - We’ll try to make sure
23:44 everything matches.
23:45 - Yeah, that one had a 2020 update,
23:47 so I don’t know if that was the newer language
23:48 that needed to happen. - Probably.
23:51 - So we’re good with taking a look at it,
23:52 bringing it back, and any cross-references,
23:55 cleaning up, right?
23:57 Okay, next up is Policy 7410, Dr. Rendell.
24:02 - Yeah, I think that’s you. - That one’s back to me.
24:04 So I’d actually like to suggest some fairly
24:08 significant changes to this policy that are over and above
24:11 what’s in NEOLA or what’s in our current policy,
24:14 and those relate to institutionalizing our best practices
24:19 of doing periodic facility assessments,
24:22 doing facility asset management programs,
24:25 and then incorporating something about standards
24:28 for building and grounds maintenance.
24:29 I mean, that’s been a big issue for us here in Brevard
24:31 over the last several years, and I think we’re moving
24:34 towards trying to fully resolve that issue.
24:37 It certainly has budget implications,
24:38 but I feel like from a policy perspective,
24:41 if we incorporate those things, then it is setting a message
24:45 in terms of how we develop our budgets,
24:47 that those things are important, so I’m gonna suggest
24:49 that we incorporate at least those three things
24:51 into this policy.
24:53 - And I wanted to say, in this policy,
24:56 Ms. Han took over and started a process
24:58 where she was putting QR codes on many of our,
25:02 many of our maintenance things, like HVAC systems
25:06 and stuff like that, and prior to that,
25:08 we would just find out this thing broke,
25:10 and then they would have to go out and try to figure out
25:12 what it was, what year it was, what a replacement,
25:16 and now we’ve done a good job, or you have done a good job,
25:19 I’m saying, of QR coding most of them to where we know
25:22 that there’s a cycle of we need to buy this many
25:25 at this time to make sure we cover it
25:26 and you’re getting there.
25:27 I just wanted to say thank you for that.
25:28 That was a huge undertaking, and I don’t know
25:30 if the new board members know about it.
25:32 - Well, thanks.
25:33 This is really a best practice in facility management,
25:36 and we’re doing pretty well in comparison to other districts.
25:39 I’m really proud of the program that our folks
25:40 have developed, so I’d like to give it a little bit
25:46 more weight in policy other than where it is now.
25:49 It’s just something that we’re doing.
25:52 - Well, I really appreciate that.
25:53 Anybody else have anything to say to 7410 Maintenance?
25:56 All right, next up is 7420 Sanitation and Housekeeping.
26:00 Dr. Rendell, is this what you’re saying?
26:01 - That’s me. - It’s again Sue, yep.
26:02 - That’s me, and I recommend just leaving that as is.
26:05 - Okay, does anybody else wish to add anything to it?
26:09 - 2020? - Yeah, Neola has an update.
26:13 We didn’t update it since 2020, 2002.
26:17 - We’ve updated ours since then.
26:19 - If you feel, ours just says Neola 2002.
26:23 We revised it on the 14, but Ms. San,
26:25 if you feel confident that this is something
26:27 that we should keep, then this is your area.
26:29 I’m okay with that.
26:31 All right, anybody else?
26:34 Nope, all right, moving forward, 7421 Restrooms
26:37 and changing facilities. - So we do not have
26:40 a policy currently, so we’re looking
26:42 for board direction on this one.
26:51 - So this is an update that came to us
26:52 from Neola that we said we needed it.
26:56 I’m sorry, go ahead, Ms. Campbell.
26:57 - Well, I was going to ask, is this,
27:02 I mean, we’re complying with state law.
27:05 I was gonna ask Paul, do we need this
27:08 to clarify for clarity for our staff,
27:12 and do we need, well, first, do we need
27:14 to have the policy for compliance?
27:16 I couldn’t find anywhere where it said,
27:17 it just said if I spend such time,
27:19 you have to report how you’re handling things,
27:22 but I didn’t know if we needed the policy for compliance,
27:24 so that was one question, but then secondly,
27:27 really to Dr. Rendell, do we need this for clarity
27:29 so that all our district staff can understand
27:33 this is how we’re handling things?
27:35 - Yeah, typically policy helps you answer
27:37 all those questions, so typically you would want
27:39 something in policy, clear definitions,
27:41 black and white, that kind of thing.
27:42 - Yeah, yeah, I’m in favor of us including this
27:44 for clarity for public and for staff.
27:48 - Anybody else?
27:49 - I support including it as well.
27:51 - Okay, I do, too.
27:52 Dr. Rendell, if you can look back at it,
27:53 there’s a couple of options on there,
27:55 I think maybe bring back a formalized policy.
27:56 - Yeah, we’ll take a look at the,
27:59 I think there’s three different options to choose from
28:00 and different language in there,
28:02 and we’ll bring you back something.
28:03 - Okay, all right, with that,
28:05 next up is 7430, risk reduction program, Dr. Rendell.
28:10 - That is with finance, with Cindy.
28:12 - Ms. Olsinski. - Ms. Olsinski.
28:22 - We definitely wanna keep this one
28:24 and actually work with facilities and robust that
28:28 because we wanna make sure that we’re reducing risk
28:31 as much as possible.
28:32 - Sure.
28:34 Okay, so send it to you, you guys will bring it back to us.
28:36 Dr. Rendell, just out of curiosity,
28:39 the turnaround on some of these policies,
28:42 is there a, just for the board to know,
28:44 are we looking at 30 days of having staff look at ‘em?
28:47 What are you thinking?
28:48 - Well, really, we’re looking at the cycle that you’re in.
28:50 As you get through each series of policies,
28:52 we try to fall right in line when you get,
28:57 when you’re done with the sevens,
28:58 you get to the eights and so on, we bring ‘em back.
29:01 Some of these, we can fast track if we need to.
29:05 - So if we are coming up with the eights,
29:07 maybe the idea is that the 1000s are on the deck
29:10 and coming for renewal, you know what I mean?
29:12 - Correct, if you think about next week’s workshop,
29:15 we’ve got some 1000 policies that have been revised
29:18 coming back for public hearing and stuff like that, so.
29:20 - Yeah, the first public hearing’s next board workshop
29:24 for all of the ones.
29:27 - I think for the most part, the idea would be
29:30 that, you know what I mean, we have some sort of a plan
29:33 moving forward of the 1000s are here,
29:35 the 2000s and everything else, so I appreciate that.
29:38 - We can send you kind of a calendar,
29:40 like when we believe these policies will be ready
29:42 to bring back to you.
29:43 - With the understanding that some of ‘em
29:44 take a little bit longer than others
29:46 and some of ‘em may need to reach out
29:47 for further clarification and stuff,
29:49 but for the most part, just a generalized one would be good.
29:54 Okay, next up is 7430.01, Environmental Health Program.
30:00 We don’t have a policy, NEOLA has one.
30:03 What do you think, Dr. Wendell?
30:06 - I think Sue was ready to jump in on that.
30:07 - Yeah, I’ll grab this one.
30:08 I’d like to take a look at that.
30:10 I’ll take the lead from a department point of view,
30:12 but we’ve got several other departments
30:14 that might have been put into this potential policy,
30:16 so we’ll come back to you with a recommendation on it.
30:20 - Okay, so the, I’m sorry, go ahead.
30:23 - We have this at 8400 a lot,
30:25 I mean, that I could tell it was very similar, at least,
30:27 and that we did update in 2020, so we can take a look
30:30 and see if that’s, we haven’t got to 8,000s yet,
30:32 so I don’t know what the templates look like,
30:33 but if we can see if that’s our,
30:36 if we already have all that content there,
30:38 then maybe we don’t need the new policy.
30:44 - We’re good with that, Ms. Ham?
30:45 - Yes, sir. - Okay.
30:47 Moving on, 7434, Smoking and Tobacco-Free Environments.
30:51 Again, there’s a NEOLA policy that we have.
30:55 We do not currently have one,
30:56 but I do know we have some rules around smoking
31:00 and stuff like that, and Ms. Ham,
31:01 do you wish to, is this your area?
31:04 - It is not, I don’t believe it.
31:06 - Okay, Dr. Rendell, I apologize.
31:08 - Yeah, no, this is, both falls under operations,
31:11 it also falls under chief of schools,
31:13 it also falls under risk management.
31:15 So we’re reviewing this, and we’ll bring it back.
31:17 - Okay.
31:18 - So before we get off this one, we have this at 3215,
31:21 and then we had this conversation in the 5,000s about,
31:24 ‘cause in the student section,
31:25 I remember Ms. Rygman said, let’s have it both places
31:28 so it’s very clear, people look at, so.
31:29 - Right. - But I don’t think
31:30 we need it in three places, so.
31:33 So we have it in the 3215, which I think is a staff section,
31:37 and we’ve got it, and we’ve talked about adding it
31:40 in the 5,000s under the student section.
31:42 - Student section, correct.
31:43 - And we most recently updated it in 2021,
31:45 so I think we might be good with–
31:49 - And the idea is to always make it mirror.
31:51 If it’s in 3,000s and 5,000s,
31:53 the language should all be set.
31:54 - Right, and honestly, I mean,
31:56 I guess it is a facilities-type thing,
31:58 but really, it’s more of a behavior-type thing,
32:00 so I think that where those other two sections
32:03 is a more appropriate place.
32:06 - Yep, and again, I think these are the ones
32:09 we’re gonna come across many of these
32:10 where staff can give us the recommendations.
32:12 Thank you for bringing that up, Ms. Campbell.
32:14 Next up is 7440, buildings and ground security.
32:17 I’m assuming, but I’m gonna ask Dr. Endell,
32:20 who has this one?
32:20 - It’s all operations and that whole section of the 7440s,
32:25 we’re reviewing all of that.
32:27 I don’t know if Mr. Wilson has anything to add right now,
32:30 but yeah.
32:32 - Would you like me just to say 7440, 7440.01, 7440.0203,
32:39 all are gonna be reviewed by Mr. Wilson and come back,
32:44 or do you guys wanna–
32:44 - One of them, I think Russ said he wants
32:46 to have a conversation, right,
32:47 over the video surveillance and electronic monitoring.
32:50 - Yeah, it’s just a cross-functional one,
32:51 so it’s Rashad, myself, and Ms. Campbell.
32:55 - Yeah, okay, well then we’ll just say,
32:56 so 7440, Rashad’s gonna work on it
32:59 and bring back a recommendation if need be.
33:01 Is that right, Dr. Endell?
33:02 - Correct.
33:03 - And then 7440.01, video surveillance
33:05 and electronic monitoring.
33:07 Did you have something to say, Mr. Cheatham?
33:12 - Well, he wrote that on the spreadsheet.
33:13 He said discussion was needed, so that’s why.
33:14 - Hang on just a second.
33:15 I don’t wanna get off of 7440 yet.
33:17 - Okay.
33:19 - Don’t rush, ‘cause we might have to comment along the way.
33:23 - I didn’t have anybody speak up.
33:24 - I didn’t get a chance.
33:25 He didn’t pause long enough.
33:28 I see the note, must remove resident mobile homes.
33:30 I saw that in there, like, what on earth?
33:33 So is that some, I know that we used to do it
33:35 because there was a mobile home on the campus
33:37 of Central Middle School that just recently
33:39 got removed literally in the last year,
33:40 and I, somebody was living in there,
33:41 and I always, it was just some kind of random,
33:44 so how did that come about?
33:46 Why, are we still, is that the only place
33:47 where it was done, or do we still have people
33:51 living on our campus?
33:52 - There’s approximately 16 in the district.
33:55 - And are there people who live there,
33:56 just people who apply to live there?
33:58 - No, they were long, I guess long before
34:00 any of us got here, they were security for the site.
34:04 So they agreed to monitor the site,
34:07 and they would check the doors and the property
34:10 to make sure nothing was going on at night
34:12 when it was closed, and this is all before
34:15 the new security requirements and fencing
34:17 and cameras and all of that, so they’ve just
34:20 never been terminated, so they’ve just continued
34:24 to function in that capacity.
34:26 - Are we paying them, or are we just providing–
34:27 - No, they get free rent, they basically get
34:29 a lot to put their trailer, and they monitor
34:32 the property in exchange for the free lot.
34:36 - It is inventive, and I’m, but I mean,
34:43 we still have people?
34:45 - So we do have about 16 of those mobile homes
34:49 on our campuses, on 16 campuses.
34:52 We did make the decision earlier to let them know
34:54 that we’re gonna terminate this policy
34:57 at the end of June, so this will be the last year
35:00 any of them– - Of June of 2024.
35:02 - June of ‘24. - Okay, so they’ve got
35:04 some time to relocate. - Right.
35:05 So we are going to stop this practice.
35:07 This is something that was done years ago,
35:10 as Mr. Gibbs mentioned, to provide an extra layer
35:13 of security for our campuses, usually at night
35:16 and on the weekends, you know, when we’re not occupied,
35:18 so these individuals were allowed to live there,
35:21 basically rent-free, in return for providing
35:24 a security service. - Right.
35:26 - In a lot of the cases, that security service
35:28 is actually not provided, and so we’re not seeing
35:31 the return on investment, so to speak,
35:33 even though we don’t really have an investment,
35:35 but really, with the new security procedures,
35:38 we don’t want anybody living on our campuses.
35:40 - Right, right. - So this is something
35:43 that was supposed to be phased out years ago,
35:46 and it never had gotten phased out,
35:48 so now we’re phasing it out.
35:50 - Well, that solved a mystery for me.
35:52 I don’t know why I didn’t ask that question before,
35:55 but thank you, I appreciate that.
35:58 - So I did want to tell you guys,
36:01 when I was a teacher at Space Coast,
36:02 they used to do reverse sound, so what would happen
36:05 is the sound from Space Coast High School
36:08 would go back into the house of the person
36:10 that was staying there in between there and Enterprise,
36:12 so if there was a loud noise at night, it would pop,
36:15 and they would know to check, call security,
36:17 stuff like that, so those were some of the things
36:19 that people had put in place with these individuals
36:21 to make sure that they were safe,
36:23 and it did actually end up catching a couple of kids
36:25 trying to play pranks and a couple other people
36:27 trying to break in, so it was actually pretty good.
36:29 The one that I did want to tell you guys about
36:30 that was pretty funny was we had one that was staying
36:33 at a location and then put it up for sale
36:35 and tried to sell it, and that was a whole ordeal
36:38 that we had to deal with, it was in my district,
36:39 and it was pretty funny because,
36:41 and it wasn’t even the person
36:42 that we had originally signed it with,
36:44 it was somebody else who had been living there
36:46 after that person had deceased, and it was (laughs)
36:50 and there was a whole battle,
36:51 and it was an interesting thing,
36:53 so I think we’re at a different place now
36:56 for our security and stuff like that,
36:59 so we’re in a different place altogether,
37:00 so thank you for doing that,
37:01 but I did want to put some context to some of it.
37:03 There are some good things and there are some bad things,
37:06 and then there’s one that was growing chickens
37:07 on the thing, and that was an interesting thing, too.
37:09 - Science.
37:10 - Yeah.
37:11 - No, it wasn’t science, it was not.
37:12 - It actually seems like it would be counterintuitive now
37:15 because if you open it to a driveway
37:17 ‘cause someone lives there,
37:17 then you’re opening the fence, external fencing,
37:19 to let other people, so I think this is a good time
37:22 with all the new rules, absolutely.
37:23 I’m supportive of that.
37:24 - I have a quick question just to chime into this.
37:26 Sue, I’m sure you know this, but as far as the residents
37:28 that are living on these 16 different properties,
37:30 is there any way you can give the board some feedback
37:32 on how long these people have been there?
37:33 I mean, is this gonna be someone that’s been on campus?
37:37 I mean, I just think about a family that’s been there
37:39 for 30 years or something, and they’re like,
37:40 “Oh, now you have to move and we’re kicking you out.”
37:42 And so, just so you can give that to us
37:45 so that we know that and prepare for that coming up,
37:47 that would be good.
37:48 - I have those contracts currently
37:50 ‘cause I drafted the notices, so I can email you all
37:54 like how long everybody’s been on
37:56 and what the properties are that they’re located.
37:58 - Okay, thank you.
37:59 - In most cases, I don’t think that the schools
38:01 actually had communications with many of them before,
38:04 so I think that this is something,
38:05 all the ones I’ve ever had,
38:07 they were not communicating back and forth.
38:08 They were just there, and it was kind of an odd thing,
38:11 so I just wanna kind of add that context.
38:14 There are maybe some that they have relationships,
38:16 but I don’t know.
38:17 - The ones I know about, they typically are not families.
38:19 They’re generally single individuals.
38:21 - Okay, all right, I would just like to know that.
38:23 - Sure, all right.
38:26 - So that was just 740, 7440, and 7440-01.
38:32 I believe Russ does wanna make a comment.
38:34 - But I did wanna finish up on that one.
38:36 We do have some custodians that actually live in those,
38:40 so there is one that I know of,
38:42 so that we may wanna take a look at
38:44 because that may be an added incentive
38:46 for somebody that’s working there to be there.
38:48 - The issue with having a security trailer on site
38:51 is that they’re not separate from the campus,
38:54 and so this is someone’s home,
38:57 and they can invite literally anyone at any time
38:59 onto the campus and not go through our security protocols,
39:03 so that’s the reason why we think
39:05 this is no longer an appropriate security function,
39:09 and in a few cases, we’re looking at doing some fencing
39:12 around the security trailer
39:13 to make sure that they are separate from campus
39:17 in those cases where we’re concerned about them
39:19 being like a safety hazard
39:20 where they’re close to the road or something like that.
39:22 - Yeah, okay, all right, thank you.
39:25 Next one up, Dr. Rendell,
39:27 Video Surveillance and Electronic Monitoring.
39:28 You had something to say?
39:30 - Mr. Cheatham, did you wanna jump?
39:32 - Yeah, I just wanted to comment.
39:33 It’s cross-functional between ET operations and facilities,
39:37 so we’ll be reviewing it and bringing that back to the board.
39:40 - Okay, anybody else wish to have anything
39:41 to say on that one?
39:43 - The difference that I noticed
39:45 was the parental consent part, so we need to have that.
39:50 I mean, basically anything that we would be recording for
39:54 is going to fall under that educational purposes
39:57 and things like that, but I’m gonna just guess
39:59 if that was that 2021 update
40:01 ‘cause that falls under the year that we were doing
40:05 the Parental Rights Bill.
40:10 So that’s the section that I noticed that we do not have.
40:17 - You good? - Yeah.
40:19 - Okay.
40:21 Good, Mr. Cheatham?
40:23 All right, moving forward, 7440.01, damage or loss.
40:27 Dr. Rendell.
40:29 - Just so again, this is something
40:30 I believe staff’s gonna review and bring back.
40:32 This is Ms. Lasinski, any comments or?
40:36 - No, that’s something that we need to.
40:39 - Review and bring back. - Exactly.
40:41 - Okay.
40:42 - Okay, anybody have any questions on 7440.02?
40:48 - Yeah, theirs has a lot more legal ramifications
40:54 as far as what we can do if someone does damage.
40:57 I don’t know if you noticed that, Paul,
40:58 but there was in the NEOLA template,
41:00 even though they were from the same year,
41:01 it had more and we could potentially go out
41:05 to get damages and things like that.
41:08 So I’d like your advisement on that one too.
41:11 - It’s really, I know some boards are hesitant
41:14 to take legal action against students.
41:17 So that’s probably why the board in 2002,
41:20 they said, “No, we’re not gonna be suing
41:21 “our families for it.”
41:23 So they chose not to implement certain provisions,
41:26 but I don’t know how we’d find that other than trying
41:29 to dig up minutes if they still exist.
41:31 - Well, and it’s not that I’m looking to go,
41:33 but I can foresee a situation that might be bigger than–
41:37 - We can include it and use a language
41:39 that’s permissive like May.
41:41 So then it’s up to the board at the time
41:43 to decide whether or not it wants to take those legal steps.
41:47 - I think that’s probably a wise decision.
41:48 I mean, we had an incident with one of my schools last year
41:50 where a fire was started in the bathroom
41:52 intentionally by a student.
41:52 - Right, with the TikTok challenges and things.
41:55 Things have changed significantly since 2002.
41:57 - Exactly, I mean, they were dismantling our bathrooms
41:59 and doing all kinds of stuff, so it’s probably good
42:02 to have the ability to exercise that
42:04 should it be something that’s just so out there.
42:06 - Or at least just have it in policy
42:08 so people are aware that that’s a potential–
42:09 - It’s a potential, right.
42:13 - Good, anybody else?
42:15 All right, staff’s gonna bring back a recommendation.
42:18 And again, if anybody has anything in the process
42:20 to follow up with, please do so.
42:22 7440.02, damage or loss.
42:28 - 03.
42:29 - Yeah, we just did that.
42:29 - I’m sorry, 7440.03, small unmanned aircraft systems.
42:33 - We just wanted this on air.
42:35 - We just revised that one, so we just prefer to keep it.
42:39 - Yeah, it’s just straight to the law of the DOE
42:41 for not using those. - Yep, 7440.03.
42:43 - All right, all right, anybody else
42:44 got anything to say on that one?
42:46 Nope, all right, 7450, property inventory.
42:50 Dr. Rendell.
42:52 - Yeah, that was with, I believe with you as well, yep.
42:56 - Right, and this is another one
42:58 that we want to have our staff take a look at
43:01 and review and make sure that we include grant managers
43:05 and responsibility for the different areas.
43:08 - Okay, anybody have any comments on this one?
43:11 Nope, moving forward, 7455,
43:13 accounting system for fixed assets, Dr. Rendell.
43:17 - I think that’s the same with Ms. Lozinski.
43:18 We wanna review that, correct,
43:20 to some changes we’ve already identified.
43:23 - We wanna keep that update.
43:24 - Okay.
43:25 - Is there a difference between,
43:27 is there a purposeful difference
43:29 between using fixed and capital?
43:31 I was checking the statutes and they don’t really,
43:33 and the rule, they don’t really use one or the other.
43:36 Was that just a rebar decision or does it legally matter?
43:40 You don’t think so?
43:42 - Part of the changes was crossing out capital
43:44 and putting fixed, so.
43:45 - Okay, okay, and then there was,
43:50 there is an administrative procedure
43:55 and I gotta read my notes.
43:59 I said administrative procedure 7310.
44:01 Why do I have that in there?
44:08 Oh, the disposition.
44:10 If we go, if we update the disposition policy,
44:15 there was something in there that needs to be related to that
44:21 Okay, well, y’all look at that, I can’t remember what.
44:24 I didn’t write down enough notes to remember what it was.
44:27 Oh, the superintendent shall develop
44:29 administrative procedures to ensure proper purchase,
44:31 transfer and disposal of fixed assets.
44:34 That’s what I was saying.
44:35 We already have that administrative procedure at,
44:38 but not with this one, it’s at 7310.
44:40 So it doesn’t have to be with this one,
44:43 but if we’re gonna say something has a procedure,
44:47 in this case, we have it, it’s just not located here.
44:50 So do with that what you want.
44:51 Even if we just link it or something, that’d be good.
44:54 Did you guys understand that?
44:58 - Yes. - Okay.
44:59 So anybody else have anything to say?
45:02 Nope, 7455 is in the good.
45:05 Moving on, 7460 conservation of natural material resources.
45:10 Talked about this policy, having some discussion.
45:13 We’ve had some discussion around this too.
45:15 Ms. Suhan.
45:20 - Self in the NEOLA version, they’re sort of inert,
45:24 but we often have competing interests in this arena.
45:30 So for example, having a very strong recycling goal
45:33 might actually cost us more money.
45:36 Saving money might cause us to do draconian measures
45:40 around air conditioning.
45:42 So there’s often a competing priority in this arena.
45:46 So if the board would like to keep a policy
45:48 around consideration of conservation
45:51 in the context of other goals, I can write something
45:55 that says that, but wanted to just ask
46:00 what you all think about this policy.
46:02 - I had a lot to talk about on this,
46:04 but I’ll give you guys the opportunity to speak ahead of me.
46:07 - So if I’m hearing you correctly,
46:10 so like our practice of cutting off the air conditionings
46:15 for extended periods of time, every time I go out
46:19 with someone who is an air conditioning person,
46:21 they say, this is not good because you wouldn’t do this
46:25 in your home, it’s hard on the machines or whatever.
46:27 Is this policy driving that or is it just cost,
46:30 ‘cause I always thought that was cost savings,
46:31 but then in the end you have to balance the cost savings
46:34 of cutting the ACs off versus damage to your equipment.
46:37 - Right, so we’ve actually made decisions to not do that
46:41 because of the damage to our stuff.
46:45 And so we’ve been lowering our set points
46:48 and we’re running the air conditioning more
46:50 because we want our folks to be comfortable
46:52 in their buildings.
46:53 If we don’t do that, it leads to indoor air quality issues
46:56 and we chase those all around.
46:57 So there’s, like I said, a lot of competing interests.
47:00 I think I could wordsmith something
47:02 that addresses the fact that there are competing interests
47:05 and conservation is a good goal,
47:08 but it’s not the only goal.
47:10 And I think it needs to be in the context
47:12 of some of our other priorities.
47:14 - Right, no, I appreciate that.
47:17 And if your recommendation is to,
47:19 because like you said, it’s a pretty benign policy
47:22 in general, on the surface, right,
47:24 but if it’s causing problems and we’re not,
47:27 with us having to put this as a goal,
47:29 I’m fine with removing it.
47:31 - Anybody else?
47:34 No?
47:34 - No, I was just getting this ready.
47:36 - Okay.
47:38 - All right.
47:39 - I thought he was going for it, he was.
47:40 - Okay, so when I look at this,
47:42 we have solar, natural gas, battery,
47:45 we have all of these things, right?
47:47 And consistently, we have individuals coming and saying,
47:50 hey, we can make natural gas buses
47:52 and they can run and save you money and solar.
47:55 You won’t have to pay for electricity after five years.
47:57 And there are some things that when you look at them,
48:00 you’re like, hey, it’s our due diligence
48:03 to take a look at those.
48:03 And I know that you’re already doing that.
48:06 In like fuel sources and everything else.
48:08 I wonder if there’s an opportunity for us
48:10 to do like a every three year review
48:13 and have a, you know, bring forward,
48:16 hey, here’s what the newest technologies are.
48:18 Here’s where the cost breaks are on them.
48:20 That might be a little bit more of a formal process
48:23 so that we’re not missing some of those components.
48:25 What do you think about that?
48:26 - So, like I said, I think I can wordsmith something
48:28 that addresses that ‘cause we do exactly what you suggested.
48:32 So for example, we’re doing several roof projects.
48:34 We looked at solar.
48:36 It’s not going to save us money at this point in time
48:39 and it has the potential to damage the roof.
48:42 So, you know, there again, competing interests.
48:45 But yes, we certainly do want to look at new technology.
48:48 Same thing in fuel sources.
48:49 I know Mr. Wilson’s been looking at different fuel sources
48:53 and buses, you know, for the bus fleet.
48:55 You know, great best practice.
48:57 But we gotta be able to get natural gas.
48:59 We gotta be able to have electric charging state.
49:01 Like the source of those alternative fuels
49:04 has to be readily available too.
49:07 So I think what you’re suggesting, Mr. Susan,
49:09 might be a way to kind of keep the policy
49:11 but we would generate our own language
49:14 around those different competing interests.
49:16 - Yeah, and I think in just in practice
49:18 is to review any kind of innovative pieces in this.
49:22 Like even the recycling piece,
49:24 there’s some innovation inside of there.
49:27 I was in one county and the county government tied
49:30 with the school district and had this trash recycling program
49:33 that created energy and they were,
49:34 I mean, there’s some cool stuff out there, right?
49:37 But I wonder if there’s an opportunity to do that.
49:39 And then maybe there’s an opportunity
49:40 where we have a work session every three years
49:42 or something like that that says, or every two years,
49:44 this is what it is, this is what we evaluated
49:46 and stuff like that.
49:47 Since you’re doing it already, our public will know,
49:50 you know, these guys that come up and try to sell solar
49:52 and they try to do this, they try to do that.
49:53 Hey, listen, we already did that.
49:54 Here’s the workshop, here’s the individual,
49:56 here’s your opportunity to talk
49:57 to more of a formal process, that’s all.
50:00 - Yeah, and we are looking at different sort of
50:03 like energy conservation techniques
50:05 and are there opportunities to do little pilot projects
50:08 in our schools that tie to the STEM program?
50:11 So like that type of thing,
50:13 I think we have some good opportunities there
50:15 where we can try little things
50:17 and see if they are scalable throughout the district.
50:20 So I think I get what you are saying
50:24 and we’ll try to wordsmith something that will get us there.
50:28 - I think where the strong language,
50:33 the absolute language of mandate
50:38 the district implement strategies,
50:39 which will conserve all forms of energy used
50:41 and or ensure proper recycling.
50:43 We want, I think it would be good to at the same time,
50:46 you know, talk about all the things that we are doing,
50:48 but I’m glad you brought up thinking about the buses
50:49 because there have been some districts that said,
50:51 we’re gonna start implementing
50:52 until we get to all electric buses, for example.
50:54 But if you read the news reports that are coming out
50:57 in recent news, it talks about the cost of batteries
51:00 and all that, so we’re, you know, you’re causing as much
51:03 or more cost as you might be saving
51:05 and maybe even messing up the environment.
51:09 - On top of it too, worse.
51:10 So I’m not interested in being a guinea pig
51:12 and we’ll kind of let everybody work out the kinks
51:15 until future boards and generations can take a look
51:17 and they’ve got it kind of more perfected
51:19 on a better for the environment,
51:21 better for the pocketbooks of our taxpayers.
51:24 But I think those, if we can, if you’ve got words
51:27 that you can put in that would not tie us
51:30 into things that we may not want to do
51:32 or may be bad for the environment or bad for our budget,
51:36 I would appreciate that or removing it all together,
51:39 which was your original suggestion.
51:40 I’m fine with that too.
51:42 - You know, Ms. Han, you put together that process
51:43 for us to go to these large, like the one we have
51:46 on October 12th for the Veterans Memorial,
51:49 you know what I mean, for the veterans,
51:51 maybe there’s a process to do this too
51:52 that you can think of and then we can go there.
51:54 So that’s all, just a thought.
51:56 - Okay.
51:57 - Doesn’t have to be in the policy, but maybe,
51:58 you know what I mean, a review or something
51:59 every so many years or something.
52:01 - Okay. - Okay.
52:02 - I think I can craft something.
52:03 - Perfect, perfect.
52:05 Okay, does anybody else have anything
52:06 on conservation of natural and material resources?
52:09 - Nope. - Moving on, 7510,
52:11 use of district facilities, Dr. Rendell.
52:14 - Yeah, so we were gonna propose
52:16 just leave this policy as is.
52:18 We updated the administrative procedures just last year.
52:21 - Okay. - So we were just gonna leave.
52:22 - Everybody okay with that?
52:24 - Yep, yep, yeah, I appreciate that.
52:27 And Dr. Rendell, I’m sure as you do your municipality tours,
52:32 you’ll be hearing some concerns
52:36 when it comes to some of that district use.
52:37 So if you could just put it on your long list of things
52:41 to ask and touch base with as you do those tours,
52:44 just ‘cause I know that there’s some concerns
52:47 that may not necessarily be accurate,
52:49 but it might be a little bit of miscommunication and stuff.
52:51 - Yeah, we can try and clear some of that up, absolutely.
52:53 Thank you, yep.
52:54 I think I know some of the things you’re talking about.
52:56 (laughing)
52:59 Okay, moving on 7511, media broadcast
53:02 of student athletic competitions.
53:04 I do know that this is being reviewed currently
53:06 by our athletic department.
53:08 If anybody has anything to kind of mention,
53:10 but I think I would wait until he brings that out
53:12 to kind of then wordsmith it, okay?
53:15 If you guys are okay with that?
53:17 All right.
53:18 Moving on to 7530, lending of board owned equipment.
53:24 We have a new policy.
53:25 Dr. Rendell, what’s your deal?
53:27 Actually, Mr. Chiam’s gonna jump in on this one, I think.
53:30 - Yeah, this is another cross-functional.
53:31 You think of laptops,
53:32 but you also think about other equipment
53:34 that we lend out.
53:36 Some equipment we check out, but this is lending.
53:39 And this also, I think, includes risk management
53:41 because when folks use our facilities and things like that,
53:45 we’re just making sure those items don’t go missing
53:48 or leave our campuses.
53:50 - Ms. Zasinski, you have something to say.
53:51 - And there’s processes for accounting
53:53 to make sure that we are keeping track of our things.
53:56 So there’s several, it’s a combined policy
54:02 that we need to work.
54:03 - That’s great.
54:04 - I have a question and this might just be a technical issue
54:07 but when I look at our website for this policy,
54:10 it’s not there, 7530?
54:12 - We do not have that.
54:13 - Okay, all right.
54:15 - So we’re taking a look at the NELA template,
54:16 seeing what we wanna–
54:17 - Sorry, I was–
54:19 - Adopt.
54:19 - It’s an area with a lot of gray areas there,
54:22 so I appreciate you guys’ work on that.
54:24 Anybody else have anything to say?
54:26 - So what you guys are saying is you do recommend,
54:28 I think this is the one you did say.
54:29 - Yes.
54:30 - Oh yeah, we wanna adopt something.
54:32 - Gotcha.
54:33 - And you notice these numbers are starting to cross over,
54:35 so there was a renumbering done by NELA at some point, so.
54:39 - Yep.
54:41 No further comment, we’ll move on to 7530.01,
54:44 staff use of cell phones, pages, pages and two-way radios.
54:48 We have a NELA update since this year.
54:50 What is the direction, Dr. Lindell?
54:53 - Yeah, so our notice recommend not to adopt the NELA policy
54:57 to keep cars.
54:59 - And it doesn’t have any statutory laws that are to it,
55:02 so you guys are okay with that?
55:03 - Wait, I thought you had said to recommend,
55:05 but not version one, version two.
55:09 - Let me check.
55:10 - On the sheet that Russell sent, not to do version one,
55:13 which was the cell phone allowance, but to do version two,
55:16 which is the board-owned wireless communications device.
55:19 - Correct, because we don’t do cell phone allowances,
55:21 so we’re not doing version one and version two
55:25 will be replacing 7530.01 that we’ll get to next.
55:29 - With the July updates?
55:31 - Correct.
55:31 - Okay, I wasn’t sure if what you sent us on the email
55:33 included the July updates or not.
55:34 - So let me explain, so the items that I sent you guys
55:37 in the educational technology NELA templates,
55:40 there are tons of options, so instead of making you guys
55:42 go through every single one of those options,
55:44 what I sent you guys was our proposed,
55:46 our recommended selections for each one of those options,
55:49 so it kind of streamlined the review of those,
55:52 so as you look at those, it’s just the options
55:54 that BPS would recommend.
55:56 Once you approve those, then we’ll add the BPS language
55:59 that’s specific for our district afterwards.
56:01 - But that was my question.
56:01 When you sent that, and it was very helpful, thank you,
56:04 did that include those July updates?
56:07 - It’s the latest version that I have.
56:08 - The very latest, okay, okay.
56:09 It probably won’t include the September ones
56:11 ‘cause those just came out.
56:12 There were a couple of years that had the September.
56:12 - And these change all the time, so it’s technology.
56:15 They’re always changing.
56:16 - Right, right, so when you bring it back to us,
56:18 it’ll have the most basic. - Correct.
56:19 - Thank you for doing that, by the way.
56:21 - So anybody, oh, and anybody other comments on this?
56:25 Okay, moving forward, 7540,
56:26 computer technology and networks.
56:29 - Again, that’s Mr. Cheatham.
56:31 - So we’ll be replacing this with the NEOLA 7540 template,
56:35 and I provided the recommended changes to you guys.
56:38 - Beautiful, and thank you for those notes.
56:39 That’s exactly what you said.
56:40 Anybody have any comments on 7540?
56:42 - I think we skipped 7530.02.
56:46 - That’s what we were just on.
56:47 - I thought we were on 7530.01 version two.
56:51 - Well, we have–
56:52 - So we went to 40, and we’ll get to 4001.02.03.
56:55 - Right, right, right, okay. - Just given direction.
56:57 - Right, right, well, somewhere in there, I missed.
56:59 - 7540, you’re good on that direction.
57:02 We’re gonna bring that back, move it to 75.
57:05 I’m not sure where your,
57:08 I mean, he had given recommendation
57:09 that 7540.01, 7540.02. - We’re not there yet.
57:14 I know we haven’t gotten there yet.
57:15 - 7540.01, 7530. - Right, 7530, if you–
57:18 - Yeah, yeah.
57:19 - So we have 7530.01, which we went,
57:21 and he said that he was gonna work on tying that
57:24 into 7530, right?
57:26 He had mentioned that he’s gonna bring back
57:27 new template 7530.01, he went through that.
57:29 - Yeah, so 7530.01 will be replaced
57:31 by the new template 7530.01 version two.
57:35 - Right, and you don’t have a 7530.02.
57:39 - Right. - Naturally.
57:40 - Well, I didn’t hear the recommendation for that,
57:42 so you’re recommending that we add 7530.02.
57:49 - Correct. - Correct.
57:49 - Which it’s gonna replace, gotcha.
57:51 Okay, now, sorry, I just, nobody,
57:53 I didn’t hear .02. - No, no, no, I appreciate it.
57:54 - Anytime. - No, you’re right.
57:55 - Anytime you need clarification, just let me know, 70.
57:57 - 7540, Computer Technology and Networks, Dr. Endo.
58:01 - Again, that’s Russell.
58:03 - We’ll be replacing that with the NELO template,
58:05 and I sent you guys the recommended changes.
58:07 - Yep, you got that inside of here.
58:08 - It got rid of Myspace.
58:10 (all laughing)
58:12 - Needed a little update.
58:13 - I don’t know why it might come back.
58:14 (all laughing)
58:16 - Right, oh, yeah, do we have pagers?
58:18 - Still says pagers, yes.
58:19 - Do pagers still exist in that one?
58:20 - My note on this one is that on 7540,
58:23 there are a lot of administrative procedures,
58:26 and I would request that we check them
58:28 for accuracy and relevance,
58:29 because a lot of them are quite old
58:31 in the world of technology.
58:32 - So what we hope to do is approve the NELO policies,
58:35 and then we’ll go back through the administrative procedures
58:37 and make sure they match the changes.
58:38 - Right, match ‘em up.
58:39 - Okay, and I’m fine with deleting Myspace.
58:42 (all laughing)
58:43 - I don’t know, just for nostalgia.
58:45 I mean, you never know it might be used.
58:46 Now it’s not gonna be covered.
58:48 That’s when we’ll jump on it.
58:50 All right, 7540.01, Technology Privacy.
58:54 Mr. Chien?
58:55 - Yep.
58:56 - We are replacing that with the NELO template.
58:58 - 7540.01, anybody have any comments on that?
59:01 Nope, all right.
59:02 Moving on to 7540.02, District Webpage.
59:06 Mr. Chien?
59:07 - We are replacing that.
59:08 It has a new name, Web Content Apps and Services.
59:11 7540.02, the NELO template.
59:14 And again, I sent you guys the BPS recommendations
59:17 for those as well. - Yes, you did.
59:18 - Yep. - Right.
59:18 - Anybody have any comments
59:19 on the District Webpage component?
59:22 - I noticed that the,
59:24 I don’t think this was included in your,
59:26 the updates that you did the checkbox,
59:27 but the July and September updates included
59:31 the list of prohibited sites and apps that the DOE puts out
59:35 and specifically mentions TikTok.
59:38 So those are things we’ll need to update
59:40 as they updated that in the most recent rulemaking.
59:43 And that was, I won’t say, I won’t just repeat it,
59:45 but it was in 0.03, 0.04,
59:48 and then I think in 7544.
59:51 Any of those that talk about that, that–
59:54 - The TikTok.
59:55 - They gave that particular list, check the list,
59:59 so that way we don’t have to keep updating it.
1:00:00 But they did specifically say TikTok,
1:00:02 so I’m assuming they’re not thinking
1:00:04 they’re gonna take that off the list.
1:00:06 But we wanna make sure we include that language too.
1:00:08 - We’ll reference the state rule when we make the update.
1:00:11 - Right, right.
1:00:14 - So we’re good with that?
1:00:15 All right, moving on, 7540.03,
1:00:18 Student Network and Internet Acceptability
1:00:20 Use and Safety, Mr. Cheatham.
1:00:24 - We are using the NEOLA template with changes sent.
1:00:27 - Yep, you guys noticed.
1:00:28 You just put all these notes inside there.
1:00:30 If there’s any comments you guys have.
1:00:32 - And the staff, when the next one’s–
1:00:34 - Yep, same thing, I just need to move through it.
1:00:37 All right, next up, 7540.04,
1:00:39 Staff, Adult Network and Internet Acceptability
1:00:42 Use and Safety, Mr. Cheatham.
1:00:47 - Adopting the NEOLA template
1:00:48 with the changes sent to the board.
1:00:50 - Yep, anybody had any conversation on that?
1:00:54 Hearing none, we’ll move on.
1:00:55 7540.05, Electronic Mail, Mr. Cheatham.
1:01:00 - This was renamed by a NEOLA
1:01:02 district issued staff email accounts
1:01:04 and we are recommending to adopt the NEOLA template.
1:01:09 - Any comments on that?
1:01:11 All right, moving forward.
1:01:12 Internet Filtering Curse Policy, 7540.06, Dr. Enville.
1:01:19 - It’s the same thing as all Mr. Cheatham here.
1:01:21 - Yep, next.
1:01:22 - We’re gonna renumber, we’re gonna keep this policy,
1:01:24 but we need to renumber it
1:01:25 because NEOLA has a different policy in this chamber,
1:01:27 so we will renumber this policy and submit it.
1:01:29 - So you’re gonna renumber it?
1:01:30 - Correct.
1:01:31 - Any comments on that?
1:01:32 - No, I recommend it remain as is,
1:01:35 just with a different number?
1:01:37 - Correct.
1:01:37 - Okay, I mean, I didn’t see any problems with it
1:01:39 unless that statute still named that, CIPA,
1:01:45 the Children’s Internet.
1:01:46 - Yes.
1:01:47 - Okay, thank you.
1:01:48 - And I believe this was in an internal written policy,
1:01:51 so we just need to renumber it.
1:01:53 Because it was internal, we gave it our own number,
1:01:54 but NEOLA used the number.
1:01:55 - Gotcha.
1:01:58 - All right, moving on, 7540.07,
1:02:01 Network Change Management Policy.
1:02:05 I’m assuming this is Mr. Cheatham.
1:02:06 - It’s a BPS policy.
1:02:09 - Okay.
1:02:09 - BPS policy that we wanna keep in place.
1:02:11 - You wanna keep it in place, don’t see any updates.
1:02:13 There’s no NEOLA updates, we’re good to go.
1:02:16 Does anybody have any comments on that?
1:02:17 - I’m good with just marking it as reviewed.
1:02:19 - All right, moving on, 7540.08,
1:02:22 Mobile Computing Device Assignment and Use.
1:02:25 Mr. Cheatham.
1:02:27 - Remove policy, it’s covered in 7530.01, 7540.03,
1:02:32 and 7540.04 covers this policy, so we’re removing this one.
1:02:36 - Okay.
1:02:37 - Are we all good with moving to the other policy?
1:02:40 All right.
1:02:41 - Yeah, I just had a note that on this one,
1:02:43 on 7540.10, 7540.12, and on 7540.13,
1:02:49 they’ve got some administrative procedures
1:02:51 that if still relevant need to be put in
1:02:54 wherever they need to go,
1:02:55 because it seemed like they were important information,
1:02:58 as long as they’re updated.
1:02:59 - Got it.
1:03:01 - Good point, Ms. Campbell.
1:03:02 Next up, it’d be 7540.09,
1:03:04 District IT Incident Response Policy.
1:03:07 Mr. Cheatham.
1:03:09 - This is a BPS policy and we would like to keep it in place
1:03:12 but we will be making some revisions.
1:03:14 - Thank you.
1:03:15 Anybody have any comments on that?
1:03:19 - Oh, hang on, are we, what number?
1:03:22 - 7540.09, District IT Incident Response Policy.
1:03:25 - No, you gotcha, sorry, I was jumping on that.
1:03:26 - No, that’s okay.
1:03:29 - I’m good.
1:03:30 - Okay, anybody else?
1:03:31 Hearing none, let’s move on to 7540.10,
1:03:34 District Web Services Policy.
1:03:37 I’m assuming that’s Mr. Cheatham.
1:03:38 - Yes, it is.
1:03:39 We would like to remove this policy.
1:03:41 These items are covered in 7540.02.
1:03:45 - Okay, anybody else wish to speak to that?
1:03:47 Have any problem with that?
1:03:48 Good, all right, moving on, 7540.11,
1:03:51 Electronic Data Confidentiality.
1:03:55 - We would like to keep this in place.
1:03:56 - Keep it in place.
1:03:57 It seems that, anybody else have any comments on it?
1:04:00 - There may be some revisions
1:04:01 but we wanna keep the policy in place.
1:04:04 - Yeah, I’m good with it as is,
1:04:05 unless they have a recommendation.
1:04:07 - Okay.
1:04:09 Hearing nobody else, 7540.12,
1:04:12 Network Access from Personally Owned Computers
1:04:14 and Other Web-enabled Devices.
1:04:17 I’m assuming that’s Mr. Cheatham.
1:04:19 - We’re gonna replace this policy.
1:04:20 It is covered in 7530.02.
1:04:23 - Okay, does anybody wish to speak to this policy at all
1:04:25 before it gets revised and sent over?
1:04:27 All right, moving on, 7540.13,
1:04:31 Utilization of the District’s Website.
1:04:34 Mr. Cheatham.
1:04:35 - We’re replacing this policy, but 7543.
1:04:39 - Okay, anybody have a problem
1:04:41 with him replacing this policy, 7543?
1:04:44 All right, moving on, 7542,
1:04:48 Access to District Technology
1:04:50 or Resources from Wireless Communications Devices.
1:04:54 Dr. Rendell.
1:04:55 - It’s me as well.
1:04:56 - Mr. Cheatham, one more time.
1:04:57 - We’re recommending to adopt an EOLA template.
1:05:01 As the board members review it, some of these policies,
1:05:04 I cover a lot of social media and things
1:05:06 that we’ve been talking about as a district
1:05:07 for quite some time.
1:05:08 So if you have any changes or any concerns,
1:05:10 please let me know as we’re updating it.
1:05:13 - Perfect.
1:05:15 Anybody have any comments on this?
1:05:16 Gonna bring forward the EOLA template
1:05:18 with some changes and move forward with it.
1:05:20 All right, next up, 7543,
1:05:23 Utilization of the District’s Website
1:05:24 and Remote Access to the District’s Network.
1:05:27 Mr. Cheatham.
1:05:28 - Adopting EOLA’s template.
1:05:30 And again, with our remote work policies
1:05:31 and things like that,
1:05:32 I just ask the board to pay close attention
1:05:34 and any concerns that you have for that,
1:05:36 just send them our way and we’ll address them.
1:05:39 - Okay, all right.
1:05:41 That is the last of the policies that we have.
1:05:43 - There’s four more, 7544.
1:05:45 - Hang on a second.
1:05:46 - Two more, actually.
1:05:50 Use of social media.
1:05:53 - Oh, there we go.
1:05:53 I’m so sorry, guys.
1:05:55 Use of social media, 7544.
1:05:59 - We’re gonna adopt the EOLA template.
1:06:00 And again, just because it’s a hot topic,
1:06:02 as you guys review it,
1:06:03 anything you see that you’re concerned with,
1:06:05 let me know and we’ll make sure to incorporate that
1:06:07 into the policy.
1:06:09 - Yeah, I did have a question on this one
1:06:14 because I was looking at the options that you selected
1:06:18 and it looked like down,
1:06:21 I’m trying to get the updates.
1:06:25 I can’t get them pulled up fast enough.
1:06:28 In the one, there was down at the bottom,
1:06:33 it said like pick nine, 10, 11 or 12 or something like that.
1:06:36 You marked 11 and 12, which was the part,
1:06:41 it’s towards the bottom,
1:06:42 employee use of personal communication devices
1:06:44 that work for social media.
1:06:46 The first one says they’re permitted to use
1:06:48 personal communication devices to access social media
1:06:50 for personal use during breaks and meal times.
1:06:52 And then the second one says they can use it
1:06:54 during work hours, provided it does not interfere
1:06:57 with the employee’s job performance.
1:06:58 So Neil had suggested that that’s a,
1:07:01 you do this or do that.
1:07:03 So I didn’t know,
1:07:04 ‘cause it seems like you don’t really need,
1:07:08 if you’re gonna do the second,
1:07:11 you didn’t really need to do the first,
1:07:13 but I don’t know if there was.
1:07:16 - They kind of say the same thing.
1:07:17 So if the board had a preference,
1:07:18 that’s kind of why I selected both of them.
1:07:20 If the board had a preference, I’m fine with either one.
1:07:22 Basically, it’s saying that employees can use it
1:07:24 either on their free time or time,
1:07:26 whether or not involved with instruction.
1:07:29 The first one’s just more,
1:07:30 it’s more specific of during breaks and meal times.
1:07:35 The second one is just saying when kind of free time.
1:07:37 So it’s less specific.
1:07:39 But if the board had an opinion on one or the other,
1:07:42 that’s why I selected both.
1:07:44 But if you don’t, I’ll pick one and move forward.
1:07:46 - Okay.
1:07:48 - Do you guys have an opinion?
1:07:49 - I’m just, go ahead, I go first.
1:07:53 - Ms. Jenkins.
1:07:53 - I don’t feel strongly either way,
1:07:55 but I think it’s better to just do the more broad
1:07:58 and generalized one, because when you create policies
1:08:01 that you can’t really manage,
1:08:03 I think that’s kind of ineffective.
1:08:05 I mean, when you have secondary schools
1:08:06 where people have all different times throughout the day
1:08:08 when they’re free, the reality of managing that
1:08:11 is impossible.
1:08:13 Proving that you had free time
1:08:15 and you weren’t engaged in instruction is a lot easier.
1:08:18 - Right, I mean, I guess the difference
1:08:20 between the first option and the second option is,
1:08:24 are we going to say that a teacher on a planning period
1:08:27 can’t use her planning time or his planning time
1:08:29 to log onto Facebook and check their thing?
1:08:31 I mean, ‘cause that’s not technically a break.
1:08:33 - Right.
1:08:34 - That’s work hours.
1:08:35 I don’t know that I’m ready to jump on that,
1:08:38 ‘cause it’s their planning time.
1:08:39 If they waste it on social media, then that’s their choice.
1:08:42 They’ll still have to do the work.
1:08:45 I was just trying to think of where it might,
1:08:48 I was trying to think outside.
1:08:49 We always think about teachers.
1:08:50 I was trying to think outside of the classroom.
1:08:51 But if we have that in there that doesn’t interfere
1:08:53 with the employee’s job performance.
1:08:56 If you’re a bathroom monitor.
1:08:58 - So I could leave it broad,
1:08:59 or I can try to list more things in option number one.
1:09:02 But as I list them, I’m always gonna,
1:09:05 something’s gonna be missed,
1:09:06 or something’s gonna come up, so.
1:09:07 - Right, well, I just didn’t want them to conflict.
1:09:10 - Like burn down?
1:09:10 - And I guess they don’t conflict.
1:09:11 They just, the second one kind of adds more onto it.
1:09:14 - Yeah, I think option 12, or the second one we’re referring
1:09:17 to is probably safer.
1:09:19 ‘Cause again, with option 11 or nine,
1:09:22 depending on which page you’re looking at,
1:09:24 it just says breaks and meal times.
1:09:26 And then what’s a break?
1:09:28 - Right.
1:09:31 Yeah, and we have different groups of employees
1:09:34 who have different types of schedules and things like that,
1:09:37 so. - Yeah.
1:09:38 Yeah, Mrs. Jenkins is right.
1:09:40 The day of an elementary teacher is much different
1:09:42 than the day of a secondary teacher.
1:09:43 So defining what a break is, and meal time, and.
1:09:48 - Right.
1:09:49 - And next time we do this, again, this is the first time,
1:09:52 but I’ll include the number so it’s a little bit more clear
1:09:54 which option was selected on each one of these.
1:09:56 I apologize for that. - Right, yeah.
1:09:57 I was having to bounce back and forth a little bit
1:09:59 to see which one you got. - The other thing is
1:10:00 it doesn’t necessarily apply just to teachers.
1:10:03 It’s all of our employees, right?
1:10:04 So as long as it doesn’t interfere
1:10:07 with your job performance, I guess is.
1:10:10 - One other question for the board,
1:10:11 and a lot of the NEOLA templates,
1:10:13 it says it charges the superintendent,
1:10:16 but in some of them it says a superintendent or designee.
1:10:18 Do you guys have a preference on that,
1:10:20 or can I just work with Dr. Bendel to figure out
1:10:22 what’s the best approach?
1:10:24 - According to the definitions,
1:10:25 capital S superintendent implies designee.
1:10:28 - Okay.
1:10:32 - Is it good on 75-44? - Yeah, good.
1:10:34 - Pretty good.
1:10:35 All right, moving on to 75-50, joint use of facilities.
1:10:38 There’s some notes in here to move it to 8-10.
1:10:40 - 75-50’s mine.
1:10:42 I looked at 8-100, and that’s the NEOLA template.
1:10:46 75-50 is a Brevard policy,
1:10:48 and I think 8-100 is really the better approach.
1:10:52 So my suggestion would be to delete this policy.
1:10:55 I’ll take a look at 8-100,
1:10:56 make sure it incorporates this, I believe it does.
1:10:58 There’s a paragraph that talks about joint facilities.
1:11:02 So that’s my suggestion, is we delete 75-50,
1:11:05 and just incorporate what we need in 8-100.
1:11:10 - Yeah, and I wanted to take a second and thank Ms. Hand.
1:11:12 We went to the Space Coast League of Cities last night,
1:11:14 and went through all of the,
1:11:16 we met with the mayors and everybody else,
1:11:18 and spoke to our plan to visit the cities.
1:11:21 Right now, as we speak,
1:11:22 and emails going out to all the mayors,
1:11:23 the city managers and city clerks
1:11:25 to establish those meetings,
1:11:27 and we should be on the road here pretty quick.
1:11:29 It was well received,
1:11:30 and I want to say thank you to Ms. Hand.
1:11:32 Interlocal agreements and facility uses
1:11:34 is one of the hot topics that they were speaking to.
1:11:36 Some of them had brought up,
1:11:38 they would like to create satellite locations for adult ed,
1:11:43 in the fact that they could,
1:11:44 they said that they could put 30 people,
1:11:46 but they just can’t,
1:11:47 just 30 people could make it to that area,
1:11:49 but not make it all the way to the other area.
1:11:51 There’s gonna be some really,
1:11:52 really interesting conversations
1:11:54 that wrap around some of these meetings.
1:11:56 We were approached by some people from the community
1:11:58 that were saying things about supporting students.
1:12:00 I think it’s gonna be a great thing.
1:12:01 So I want to say thank you, Ms. Hand.
1:12:03 We had that policy, so.
1:12:05 With that, I think we’re in a good spot
1:12:07 to move towards the next part of our agenda,
1:12:09 which is to discuss public comment,
1:12:13 and I think I’m gonna give the floor to Ms. Campbell,
1:12:16 who would just speak on this topic,
1:12:18 and then we can go from there.
1:12:19 - Thank you.
1:12:20 Yeah, I did some more,
1:12:22 if anybody in the public was confused by the description,
1:12:26 it’s the public, it’s not a public speaking Bill 1069,
1:12:30 but it’s the public speaking aspect
1:12:31 of how that impacts us as a board.
1:12:35 Did some more thinking, talking, listening, soul searching,
1:12:40 and I have,
1:12:44 you know, I’m still gonna put my suggestion on the table
1:12:48 of just, you know, cutting off the cameras
1:12:51 for the live stream specifically for all public comment,
1:12:55 just so we’re treating everybody the same,
1:12:56 but then we would record it and to post it separately
1:12:59 with content warnings if necessary.
1:13:01 So we would always have those,
1:13:02 and I think staff does a really good job
1:13:04 of uploading things really fast.
1:13:05 I think we’re talking about like a day turnaround.
1:13:07 We’re not talking about a week before they get posted,
1:13:09 but you know, just something,
1:13:12 they should be up there quickly.
1:13:13 So I think, ‘cause that just gives us the,
1:13:16 we’re gonna treat everybody the same,
1:13:17 but this content might come out there.
1:13:19 But there is another option that I would,
1:13:23 if we could do that, and I think this is where,
1:13:27 Mr. Tran, I appreciate you taking the consideration
1:13:29 you mentioned the other night
1:13:30 about maybe we’ll just separate agenda and not agenda again
1:13:33 like we had before because of the changes,
1:13:35 but I actually think maybe we could have a,
1:13:38 I very much appreciated your point
1:13:40 of it’s not just the broadcast,
1:13:43 it’s who’s in the room,
1:13:44 because we also have children and students,
1:13:47 other teenage students who attend frequently,
1:13:50 and we want them to attend.
1:13:52 We encourage them, and we love to hear them speak
1:13:54 even when they’re not happy.
1:13:55 It’s students advocating for themselves and for their peers,
1:13:57 and I appreciate that.
1:14:00 So that point was well taken,
1:14:02 and so I wondered if we might have,
1:14:05 rather than agenda, not agenda,
1:14:06 because sometimes these will be on an agenda,
1:14:08 but if we can put the book challenge process
1:14:11 or someone who’s gonna come to do that part at the end,
1:14:14 and we don’t have it live streamed,
1:14:16 but we record it for posterity,
1:14:18 and anybody who wants to see it, we post it,
1:14:20 but that we have that conversation towards the end,
1:14:23 because then we don’t run the risk of exposing
1:14:27 not just the broadcast audience,
1:14:29 but our in-house audience to content
1:14:32 that we might not want them to be exposed to,
1:14:35 and again, I like these FCC rules.
1:14:38 I think they’re important,
1:14:39 and I don’t want to put that out
1:14:41 just for my own level of comfort,
1:14:44 and it’s not just, I know when we think about these things,
1:14:47 we think specifically about the explicit sexual content,
1:14:50 but I have to go back to my statement
1:14:52 that I made the other night,
1:14:53 which is there may be things that we don’t want to broadcast
1:14:57 that don’t rise to the level, or sink to the level,
1:15:00 of prohibited content.
1:15:02 They don’t sink to the level
1:15:03 of that sexually graphic explicit material,
1:15:05 but we still don’t want them going out over our airwaves
1:15:08 in a live broad stream, so that is where my mind
1:15:11 continues to go back to,
1:15:12 so whatever the board would like to consider,
1:15:18 but I do want to put both those out there.
1:15:20 One, that we just cut them off,
1:15:21 and I talked to Dr. Rendell about that
1:15:23 when I first had this concern last week,
1:15:25 and I suggested that might be a good idea,
1:15:29 just in general, to have them off
1:15:32 while we’re doing it, and post them,
1:15:34 but I would also suggest that maybe we could do that,
1:15:37 have it as a separate section,
1:15:39 but again, the non-agenda agenda thing
1:15:41 won’t necessarily help because we will have these.
1:15:44 If we do the policy change
1:15:45 that we were talking about a month ago,
1:15:47 then they will be an agenda item,
1:15:48 and that doesn’t solve that problem, so.
1:15:52 - Okay, so if I can clarify, Ms. Campbell,
1:15:55 you’re trying to discuss moving public comment
1:15:58 to be recorded and not go live,
1:16:00 and I’m also hearing you say
1:16:02 that there may be an opportunity
1:16:04 where in relation to book challenge material
1:16:07 and conversations, we would separate that to the end,
1:16:11 and would we record those also would be your recommendation?
1:16:15 Okay, so you would have two recordings
1:16:17 if anybody was to speak to book challenges,
1:16:19 so it’d be kind of like, okay, you have this,
1:16:22 you have public comment, and anybody that comes in,
1:16:24 unless it’s on the agenda, like you said,
1:16:26 we would move it to the afterwards,
1:16:28 and record that also, and have two recordings.
1:16:30 - No, I’m making two, well,
1:16:33 I’m just trying to clarify. - Maybe I should have made
1:16:34 one suggestion at a time.
1:16:35 It’s either or. (laughs)
1:16:37 My first suggestion was, if the board will go with me,
1:16:40 is that we stop live-streaming the public comments,
1:16:44 we just record them and put ‘em on later,
1:16:46 whether there’s a book challenge process in there or not,
1:16:48 so that would be my first suggestion,
1:16:49 that we just don’t record it.
1:16:53 The second, if we’re not willing to do that,
1:16:55 my second suggestion was, because of Mr. Trent’s point
1:16:58 of people in the room, right,
1:16:59 we gotta consider the audience in the room as well,
1:17:03 that we move all book challenges,
1:17:05 whether on the agenda or not agenda, to the end,
1:17:09 and part of that is going to require that, I think,
1:17:14 there’s no, how, you know, we’ve looked at the law,
1:17:17 and it says, “Challenge material.”
1:17:19 What, somebody could get up there and start reading,
1:17:21 and we don’t know, and here’s why I think
1:17:23 this is so important, because this is putting
1:17:26 all of the weight and the decision-making
1:17:28 on one person on the board
1:17:32 to, of the work that we’ve done in policy and whatever,
1:17:35 and again, not, we’re think, we always think
1:17:37 about the sexually explicit material,
1:17:38 but there’s so many other things that we don’t want to,
1:17:40 I wouldn’t want to be broadcast,
1:17:42 and we’re putting all the weight on the chair,
1:17:43 because they’re the one who’s gonna make the call
1:17:45 of not knowing, of knowing whether this is one of the books
1:17:49 or whatever, so we need to refine that either way
1:17:53 to confirm that this is a book that’s being challenged,
1:17:56 or is it even a book that’s on our shelves?
1:17:57 Is it a book, I’ve had some people say,
1:17:59 “Oh, you still have it.”
1:18:00 And I’m like, “No, we do not have it.”
1:18:02 But they’re still looking at an old reference
1:18:04 of where it is, so I’m trying not,
1:18:06 I’m sorry that I’m mixing some kind of things,
1:18:08 but I really feel like it, either or,
1:18:12 is what I’m looking at, Mr. Susan.
1:18:15 - Okay, I will say, just for a point of clarification,
1:18:19 I have no problem issuing and controlling
1:18:22 the board’s decision when these are coming up.
1:18:24 Like, that’s not an issue at all for me,
1:18:26 so if that’s ever kind of the weight of it
1:18:28 and everything else, I’ve never felt the weight of it.
1:18:30 I have no problem identifying the books
1:18:32 that are being challenged.
1:18:33 I have no problem doing all of that stuff.
1:18:35 But I will clarify for you that Ms. Campbell
1:18:37 would like to, one, make the recommendation to move,
1:18:40 not to record live, and two, in the event
1:18:43 that there’s a book challenges and stuff like that,
1:18:46 she’d like to have that possibly separated.
1:18:49 And then there was also a third component
1:18:50 which said that we would like to have a,
1:18:54 “Hey, if this is a book that you wish to speak to,
1:18:56 “then please notify the book,” and if it’s being challenged
1:18:59 or not, I’m okay with that component of it.
1:19:02 That would be nice to know ahead of time.
1:19:03 But those are the three things to discuss,
1:19:05 so I’ll leave the floor open
1:19:06 if anybody wishes to discuss it.
1:19:09 Anybody have any comments on it?
1:19:12 Ms. Jenkins.
1:19:13 - So, Mr. Gibbs, I have a couple of questions first.
1:19:16 - Yep.
1:19:17 - Legal questions.
1:19:19 So, if we decided to leave it as it was,
1:19:24 and if we had one meeting where clearly it’s abused,
1:19:29 and then we decide meetings forward to change it,
1:19:35 does that put us in legal jeopardy
1:19:36 because it’s obvious that we’re changing it
1:19:39 because of the behavior that was displayed?
1:19:42 - As I said at the meeting,
1:19:43 I think you could potentially run into a claim
1:19:46 for viewpoint discrimination
1:19:47 if you’re only impacting book review type material.
1:19:53 That’s something I would wanna look at
1:19:55 with the case law out there
1:19:56 and see if there’s any possible guidance on it.
1:19:59 If the decision is,
1:20:00 “Hey, we’re just gonna cut public comment,”
1:20:03 I don’t think so ‘cause everybody
1:20:04 that’s providing public comment is treated the same.
1:20:08 So, everybody would be non-livestreamed
1:20:12 and recorded and posted.
1:20:14 - Okay.
1:20:17 My other legal question would be,
1:20:19 are we going to put ourselves into a legal question
1:20:24 if we don’t do agenda, non-agenda,
1:20:28 but we do just book challenges separately?
1:20:31 - That would go back to if you just moved them
1:20:34 to the end of the meeting and livestreamed them,
1:20:36 then you’d probably be okay.
1:20:38 That’s separating agenda versus there,
1:20:40 but could someone make out a claim?
1:20:43 They could argue it.
1:20:44 I think that you would be on firmer ground
1:20:47 saying, “We’re just controlling our agenda
1:20:49 “by moving those toward the end of the meeting
1:20:51 “if someone wants to do that.”
1:20:53 - Okay.
1:20:55 So, I needed to ask those questions
1:20:57 before I formulate my final opinion here,
1:21:01 but I get where you’re going, Ms. Campbell,
1:21:04 with putting the book challenges at the end.
1:21:05 My concern is that’s gonna be a lawsuit waiting to happen.
1:21:09 Even if we’re on firmer ground, it’s not concrete,
1:21:14 and it would concern me that someone would say
1:21:16 if we’re only putting book challenges in one area
1:21:18 that we’re classifying those when we shouldn’t be
1:21:22 versus when we had agenda versus non-agenda
1:21:24 because we’re not required to do non-agenda.
1:21:27 So if we’re gonna do that,
1:21:28 I think it has to be one or the other,
1:21:30 and I’m not saying I’m for or against it either way.
1:21:33 That’s just my concern legally.
1:21:38 When it comes to live or recorded,
1:21:41 so originally when we had these conversations
1:21:43 about cutting the camera, I was always against it
1:21:47 because I think it fell into the trap
1:21:50 of lack of transparency for the community,
1:21:53 but if we’re recording it,
1:21:55 ‘cause that wasn’t part of the conversation last time,
1:21:57 then my concern goes away.
1:21:59 I don’t see the difference.
1:22:01 It doesn’t really matter if it’s live or it’s recorded,
1:22:03 and I guess my question would be,
1:22:05 we posted immediately after the live’s over,
1:22:08 so I don’t, and someone in GCR might yell at me
1:22:12 and tell me this is impossible,
1:22:13 but I don’t see why we can’t post
1:22:14 the recorded right away, too.
1:22:16 I don’t know why there would be a huge lapse.
1:22:19 So if, again, I would like to know the answer
1:22:23 to that question, ‘cause if that’s true,
1:22:26 if it could literally get posted right after the meeting,
1:22:28 then I have no problem with that.
1:22:29 I mean, I don’t see the concern there at all.
1:22:35 The other thing, too, that I think is important
1:22:37 for the public to be aware is this bill
1:22:41 isn’t necessarily saying that parents have the right
1:22:44 to read the passages aloud and be stopped
1:22:47 at a board meeting.
1:22:47 It has nothing to do with that.
1:22:49 The bill is intentionally written broadly
1:22:51 like every other piece of legislation
1:22:53 that has come through in the past two years
1:22:55 so that it can be manipulated and/or put in the hands
1:22:59 of other people to make these decisions
1:23:00 and create the ramifications,
1:23:02 and so what the bill is saying is that parents have a right
1:23:07 to have access to the book,
1:23:09 whether it be electronic or in hand,
1:23:12 and read it if it was objected,
1:23:14 which makes sense, so you’re not hiding the content
1:23:17 that has been objected to,
1:23:20 but it has already been abused in other counties
1:23:22 to be used a different way,
1:23:24 and that wasn’t the intention, in my opinion,
1:23:27 when you read it, but there’s nothing stopping them
1:23:30 from getting away from that legally, correct, Mr. Gibbs,
1:23:33 ‘cause it’s just broad?
1:23:34 - You can read it in numerous ways,
1:23:37 and that’s where the attorneys have come down
1:23:39 and is like, well, we read it this way,
1:23:41 but the plain definition of to read
1:23:45 is either read to yourself or read out loud,
1:23:48 so if your public comment period allows non-agenda topics,
1:23:53 they can come and read it out loud over their three minutes,
1:23:56 and if you stop them based on the plain language
1:23:59 and the rule, then you’re supposed
1:24:02 to stop use of that material.
1:24:03 - Yeah, so the reason I bring that up
1:24:06 is just for the public.
1:24:07 Because we’re talking about it one way,
1:24:10 the way it would be abused,
1:24:12 I just want the public to be aware of,
1:24:14 that’s the way it would be abused.
1:24:16 That’s not what it, at least I don’t think,
1:24:19 the main intention was here.
1:24:20 The intention was so parents had access
1:24:21 to those books that were being challenged,
1:24:23 and they had a right to access those books.
1:24:26 So I just want the public to be aware.
1:24:28 This isn’t a law that the state created intentionally
1:24:30 for parents to come read at the podium
1:24:32 and we’re trying to circumvent in any way.
1:24:35 And then I said this last time, but I’ll say it again.
1:24:38 I’m not concerned about the burden it puts on one person.
1:24:41 I just think it’s inappropriate that one person
1:24:44 makes that decision for the entire district.
1:24:48 I think that’s the whole point of the policy
1:24:49 and the committee that we had put in place.
1:24:52 Especially when it’s the consequence
1:24:55 of a very broadly written law
1:24:57 that has nothing to do with that exact scenario.
1:25:00 So I would be most in favor for leaving it alone,
1:25:06 and if it’s abuse changing it,
1:25:07 I’m just concerned about the legal ramifications
1:25:09 if we do that, because then the only solution
1:25:13 would be changing it to agenda, not agenda then,
1:25:16 according to what I just asked,
1:25:17 if someone else has a different clarification or question.
1:25:21 I’m most in favor for that.
1:25:24 Let the public react to this law,
1:25:27 and if they choose to react a certain way
1:25:28 and we as a board choose to respond to it,
1:25:30 I think that’s the appropriate thing to do.
1:25:32 But I’m also not against, that’s my number one choice,
1:25:36 but I’m not against Ms. Campbell’s choice of recording it,
1:25:40 as long as it’s posted exactly
1:25:42 when the live meeting is posted.
1:25:43 Which again, I don’t understand why we can’t do that.
1:25:46 That way there’s no delay
1:25:47 and there’s as little conflict as possible.
1:25:52 - So I’m hearing you say that you’re okay to move
1:25:54 to not record them live only if they can be released
1:25:59 fairly shortly after the meeting, is that true?
1:26:05 - Okay, I don’t need clarification of what I said,
1:26:07 so I’m gonna say it again,
1:26:08 ‘cause I don’t want it to get misinterpreted.
1:26:11 My number one choice is to let it be,
1:26:15 but if it’s abused, I expect this board
1:26:17 to have a conversation about the response to that.
1:26:21 Because I would hope that this board,
1:26:24 like Ms. Campbell said, respects that that’s not
1:26:27 why this law was written, to be abused that way,
1:26:30 to ban books off of our shelves.
1:26:32 And I hope this board will respect the policy
1:26:34 that they created themselves and the committee
1:26:36 they created themselves and the people they appointed
1:26:38 to the committee to have that conversation if it’s abused.
1:26:43 That’s my number one priority.
1:26:45 My second choice would be to record it
1:26:48 and post it immediately with the live stream.
1:26:53 - Okay, thank you, Ms. Jenkins.
1:26:55 Is anybody over here?
1:26:57 Mr. Trump.
1:26:59 - I think it’s good.
1:27:01 I believe we need to continue with the conversation
1:27:04 of first choice, second choice, yes,
1:27:08 I guess we could leave it alone.
1:27:11 I’ve always been a fan of splitting the public comment
1:27:17 of agenda, non-agenda items, and then not recording,
1:27:23 you know, not live streaming of the non-agenda items.
1:27:26 Ms. Campbell, it corrects, it’s gonna be on the agenda
1:27:29 at some point, books, and the good thing about that,
1:27:33 I don’t believe it’ll be meeting after meeting,
1:27:36 that it’ll be on the agenda, so maybe at that point
1:27:39 we would fall back on the chair to take charge of that one.
1:27:48 If we leave it the same way, I think we know which way,
1:27:52 I think I know how the public comment’s gonna go.
1:27:56 And we’d just be discussing this again at another time
1:28:00 if we leave it.
1:28:01 So I’m for splitting the public comment,
1:28:06 I am just off the top of my head,
1:28:08 I think that would be wise.
1:28:10 I mean, we have work to do, we have to govern,
1:28:12 and we’ve seen meetings, and you’ve seen longer meetings
1:28:15 than me, where it’s just, by the time we get down
1:28:20 to doing what we’re supposed to be doing,
1:28:22 it’s way into the evening, and that’s unfortunate.
1:28:27 So I just think it would be a better way
1:28:29 to run our meetings, but that’s just my two cents there.
1:28:33 - So you’re suggesting a third option.
1:28:35 (laughing)
1:28:37 - Well, you kinda had that, didn’t you?
1:28:38 And Ms. Jenkins mentioned it, too,
1:28:40 about this is where we can discuss it.
1:28:42 - Could you just clarify, you just wanna separate it,
1:28:45 but you don’t wanna stop the livestream.
1:28:48 - On non-agenda items, I would stop the livestream.
1:28:50 - You would? - Yeah.
1:28:51 - Okay, sorry, I couldn’t hear you.
1:28:52 - No, it’s fine, it’s just working.
1:28:54 - So yeah, I think that’s the same as Ms. Campbell.
1:28:58 I thought it was. - But not recording.
1:29:01 Recording and playing later?
1:29:03 - Yeah, I don’t mind if it’s recorded.
1:29:04 I think people need to hear it if they wanna hear it.
1:29:06 - Right, but it wouldn’t be livestreamed.
1:29:09 - Not livestreamed.
1:29:10 I mean, I think that would stop.
1:29:13 And it really isn’t about who’s speaking when.
1:29:16 I just don’t think it’s necessary.
1:29:18 I mean, if the objective for public comment
1:29:21 is to get us to hear something, then they’re achieving it.
1:29:25 If it’s anything other than that,
1:29:30 it’s not productive for us and it’s showing.
1:29:33 - Right, and we’ve had that conversation before.
1:29:35 You don’t have a constitutional right
1:29:38 to our cameras and microphones.
1:29:40 You have a right to our ear.
1:29:44 So I understand that.
1:29:45 When we did that before, that was what everybody,
1:29:49 so the difference factor would be the recording.
1:29:54 So I’ll hear you.
1:29:55 - Can I, I’m assuming this,
1:29:58 but I just want to ask a legal clarification
1:30:02 and then make a statement in case anyone’s listening.
1:30:04 So Mr. Gibbs, would there be an issue
1:30:07 if we are recording it and posting it
1:30:12 in its entirety in true form in terms,
1:30:18 is it just for live broadcasting
1:30:20 where we fall into that issue?
1:30:23 - What do you mean?
1:30:24 You two spill out all kinds of stuff,
1:30:25 so I don’t think we’re breaking any rules there.
1:30:27 - The FCC would only apply to our live broadcast.
1:30:30 At that point, you’re on the internet
1:30:32 and searching it out yourself, so you would be fine.
1:30:34 - So I guess I’m just gonna make a statement,
1:30:38 and I think it’s a fair assumption here,
1:30:40 but that the three people who made that comment
1:30:42 about recording it, the intention is for it to be recorded
1:30:45 and posted exactly how it is, no editing, no, yeah, yeah.
1:30:49 And I mean, I’m assuming that.
1:30:51 I just, you know, when people are gonna listen to this,
1:30:53 they’re gonna be really sensitive and concerned about that,
1:30:55 so I wanted to say it publicly for all of us.
1:31:01 - And in a clarification of mine,
1:31:03 when we talk about recording,
1:31:04 say recording non-agenda comments,
1:31:08 are we talking video and audio or just audio?
1:31:11 - Yeah, just like we do other things.
1:31:14 And to, hey, to jump in here, I mean, just other,
1:31:17 some of the other boards in the state
1:31:19 don’t have to deal with this
1:31:20 because they either don’t record
1:31:23 and broadcast their meetings at all,
1:31:25 and there are a few counties who don’t.
1:31:27 If you wanna watch the meeting,
1:31:28 you gotta be there in person.
1:31:30 Or they don’t livestream it, they record it,
1:31:32 and they upload it later.
1:31:33 So these rules don’t apply to them.
1:31:36 That doesn’t handle my personal code
1:31:38 of I don’t want it going out on my watch.
1:31:41 But it does, they don’t have to deal with the FCC rules,
1:31:43 like the counties like ours that livestream.
1:31:46 So it’s, some counties just don’t have to deal with that.
1:31:49 So they have just allowed whatever to happen
1:31:51 and they’re dealing with it.
1:31:52 ‘Cause it’s been happening in other places
1:31:54 besides just Indian River.
1:31:59 - Okay, so real quick,
1:32:00 if I can kind of make some sense out of it.
1:32:02 I know, I know, I know, I know,
1:32:04 but just so I can get this,
1:32:05 the conversation has been wrapped around live streaming
1:32:08 or recording, right, the agenda items.
1:32:11 And then the other topic that’s sort of starting to come up
1:32:13 is whether we move to agenda and non-agenda items.
1:32:18 And we’ve kind of given some conversation around that.
1:32:22 If I could just ask real quick,
1:32:26 Ms. Campbell is in favor of recording them.
1:32:29 Are you also in favor of splitting the agenda
1:32:31 to the non-agenda?
1:32:33 - If that’s where we can get,
1:32:34 I mean, that’s why this conversation,
1:32:36 let’s just everybody kind of talk
1:32:37 and come up what we can come to consensus to,
1:32:39 because I could be in favor of that.
1:32:42 At some point, it’s going to be on the agenda.
1:32:44 So that’s, and to your point, Ms. Trent,
1:32:47 that’s going to be,
1:32:48 it’s whenever the committee makes a recommendation, right,
1:32:50 and then we’ll have to come up and it will just depend.
1:32:55 I could be, I could be agreeable to that.
1:32:59 - So what you’re saying, if I can get this straight,
1:33:02 is you’re okay with splitting the agenda, non-agenda,
1:33:05 and then what you’re saying is,
1:33:07 is that we would not record the non-agenda,
1:33:09 or could you give some clarification to that?
1:33:11 So say we split it, which is what she says
1:33:13 she’s in favor of.
1:33:14 Are you saying to record both agenda and non-agenda
1:33:16 and release them?
1:33:17 Or are you saying to only record the non-agenda?
1:33:20 I just– - No, no.
1:33:23 You asked what I really want?
1:33:25 I don’t believe that would be,
1:33:28 I don’t think we can get,
1:33:29 I don’t think we can get away with that.
1:33:31 I think we should record both.
1:33:35 And I believe that’s what Ms. Jenkins and Ms. Campbell–
1:33:37 - Broadcast, record both or broadcast?
1:33:39 - We’re not gonna live, no, not live streaming it.
1:33:42 - Which one? - The non-agenda.
1:33:43 - Okay, right, right, right, that’s what I thought.
1:33:44 - You need to do the agenda.
1:33:46 - So we would live stream the agenda, not live stream,
1:33:49 and record the non-agenda, is what it is, okay?
1:33:52 Is that– - From what I’m hearing,
1:33:55 that’s exactly what– - Is that what you’re saying?
1:33:57 - The two have spoken so far, have also said.
1:34:00 - Yeah, the separation I was originally suggesting
1:34:02 was just moving the book challenges to the end,
1:34:05 whether they’re agenda or non-agenda,
1:34:06 but if that’s not gonna fly, that’s fine.
1:34:13 Mr. Gibbs, is that something we can do
1:34:16 if we separate them from agenda to non-agenda?
1:34:18 - Yeah, non-agenda, you can eliminate
1:34:21 non-agenda comments altogether.
1:34:23 So if the board says we’re only gonna hear comments
1:34:27 to the agenda items at night,
1:34:29 then the board is well within its rights to do so.
1:34:33 - All right, so it looks like it has legal standing.
1:34:36 Looks like you have, Ms. Jenkins,
1:34:38 is that something that you would support doing,
1:34:41 separating the agenda to non-agenda?
1:34:42 And going that route?
1:34:45 - Mr. Susan, I already said my piece.
1:34:49 I think he’s trying to get it straight in his own mind.
1:34:51 - Just trying to get it straight here
1:34:52 so that we can then move forward.
1:34:53 - And after we, I’m sure after we hear from the two of you–
1:34:55 - Go ahead, Ms. Megan. - It’s clear as mud.
1:34:58 Yeah, this is one of those things where,
1:35:00 listen, public comment is everyone loves free speech,
1:35:03 but when it comes down to the time to actually defend it,
1:35:07 which is kind of where we’re at right now,
1:35:08 like how much do you love it?
1:35:09 I get it, it’s not comfortable.
1:35:12 - I guess the FCC regulation is really
1:35:14 what is messing with us on televising live,
1:35:19 if I’m understanding this correctly,
1:35:20 the stuff that’s getting read from this.
1:35:24 Is that correct, Mr. Gibbs?
1:35:26 That is really what this is all about.
1:35:28 - The FCC rules play into it.
1:35:30 Now, I’ll say, I’ve never heard of a district get hit
1:35:36 for an FCC violation for allowing people
1:35:39 to read books on their broadcast,
1:35:41 and there are some counties that have allowed it for a while
1:35:45 even before the book challenge statute came down,
1:35:48 they had people come and read books
1:35:50 and argue the book shouldn’t be there,
1:35:52 and they’ve never been hit.
1:35:56 - To clarify, though, obscene,
1:35:58 this is straight from the FCC rules page,
1:36:00 obscene content does not have protection
1:36:02 by the First Amendment.
1:36:02 So I talk about defending,
1:36:03 I will defend the First Amendment,
1:36:05 and I actually don’t, I will defend,
1:36:06 I’m gonna, our public is gonna come alive and unglued
1:36:10 if we don’t allow non-agenda items at all,
1:36:14 which is our right to do.
1:36:16 But just to be clear, this isn’t a free speech.
1:36:20 You don’t have a right to say everything you wanna say
1:36:23 at every location that you want to say it.
1:36:25 That’s not the First Amendment.
1:36:29 - So I’m where I was before,
1:36:32 and as uncomfortable as that situation is,
1:36:34 so I guess at this point,
1:36:35 it sounds like the board majority
1:36:36 is moving a different direction anyways,
1:36:38 but I can see the benefit
1:36:41 of having agenda versus non-agenda.
1:36:43 It probably would help this board as far as governance goes,
1:36:46 just because it is a little rough
1:36:47 to have to hear 30, 40 people come out
1:36:49 and hurl insults for three minutes
1:36:51 and then be in your best frame of mind to govern afterwards.
1:36:55 So if there were any compromise
1:36:57 I was gonna make on this one,
1:36:59 I would be in favor of supporting the agenda
1:37:01 versus the non-agenda split.
1:37:06 - As far as televising it live versus playing it back,
1:37:10 here’s the other reality,
1:37:11 is that if somebody sits here and reads it
1:37:13 and we’re not streaming it live
1:37:15 and there’s kids in the room,
1:37:17 the kids in the room are still hearing it,
1:37:18 so it doesn’t protect them if we’re not streaming it live.
1:37:21 You know what I’m saying?
1:37:22 So that’s where I just like,
1:37:24 there’s no perfect answer in this situation, unfortunately.
1:37:26 There really isn’t.
1:37:27 And so what I hope would happen
1:37:29 is that the community would recognize the fact
1:37:31 that we have revised the policy
1:37:32 that we have put into place some protections at this point,
1:37:36 so the need to come here and read a book doesn’t really,
1:37:39 it’s not necessary ‘cause the book isn’t accessible
1:37:41 if it’s gone through the formal challenge process anyways,
1:37:44 so all you’re really doing is looking
1:37:46 for a three-minute clip.
1:37:47 And then the other thing I’ll say
1:37:47 about agenda versus non-agenda,
1:37:49 which is very maddening to me,
1:37:50 is that we have people come
1:37:52 and they speak every single week or every other week,
1:37:54 whatever it is at our board meetings,
1:37:56 and never once try to reach out to me anyways,
1:37:58 I don’t know about you guys,
1:37:59 to sit down and talk to us about these things,
1:38:01 to actually have a conversation.
1:38:03 So public comment is frustrating.
1:38:04 It is extremely frustrating
1:38:05 ‘cause we understand that people are doing it
1:38:07 because they want to have three minutes of a clip,
1:38:11 in essence.
1:38:12 And so, again, where I’m at, where I fall,
1:38:15 is if I were gonna do any compromise,
1:38:16 it would be I would split the agenda versus the non-agenda.
1:38:19 That way, people are speaking towards the things
1:38:22 that we’re actually governing on that evening,
1:38:24 and then at the end of it,
1:38:25 we can take the attacks that are gonna get hurled over,
1:38:29 things that are not on the agenda, so.
1:38:32 - All right, so Paul, it would be a policy change
1:38:35 to move it to separate, correct?
1:38:38 - Yes, we’d have to change the policy,
1:38:40 and in the meantime, you would have to make motions
1:38:44 to split the agenda again, like you’ve done in the past.
1:38:48 But just some considerations that came up
1:38:51 last time we had the split is how are you gonna handle
1:38:54 someone who wants agenda and non-agenda topics?
1:38:58 Are you gonna take all of their comments
1:39:00 in one three-minute block during agenda?
1:39:04 In which case you’re creating a loophole,
1:39:06 so somebody will talk to an agenda item for 30 seconds
1:39:10 and then spend the rest of their two and a half minutes
1:39:13 reading a book.
1:39:15 Or are you going to say you get two three-minute periods,
1:39:19 you can have your three minutes on an agenda topic,
1:39:22 and then three minutes at the end on non-agenda topics
1:39:25 like we did last time?
1:39:27 - I think we can get to that in a second,
1:39:28 and we can also get to that.
1:39:30 I just, I wanted to say that I do hear a board majority,
1:39:32 I’ll speak to all these topics,
1:39:34 but before I get going I just wanted to make sure
1:39:36 I hear a board majority of splitting the agenda topics.
1:39:39 I wasn’t completely sure on whether we are recording these
1:39:43 or if we’re going to let agenda and non-agenda run.
1:39:46 Can I get clarification on that?
1:39:48 Megan, did you want to allow it to be recorded
1:39:51 or do you want it to allow it to be live?
1:39:56 - I guess I, to me, I was in favor of live always,
1:40:01 but that’s, yeah, I guess it’s not a government majority.
1:40:04 It sounds like everyone’s kind of been
1:40:05 reporting versus– - Okay.
1:40:07 - Sorry, I’m not– - And I’m sorry
1:40:09 to go back in reverse order.
1:40:11 - Yeah, no, it’s okay.
1:40:12 - Mr. Trent, do you want to record the,
1:40:17 both agenda and non-agenda and split them too?
1:40:20 Is that kind of the direction that you would like to go?
1:40:23 - I would prefer live streaming the agenda comment.
1:40:28 - Okay. - And record the non-agenda.
1:40:31 - Okay, and then Ms. Campbell, can you get clarification?
1:40:34 - Right, if we’re gonna split agenda and non-agenda,
1:40:36 I would, like Mr. Trent, I’d rather live stream
1:40:38 the agenda comments and record the non-agenda
1:40:43 to be posted soon after.
1:40:45 - Okay, and Ms. Jenkins, you wanna give some clarification?
1:40:49 - Yeah, so I just, I want to reiterate,
1:40:52 there is a board majority, but I do want to reiterate,
1:40:54 like my number one choice is to allow the public
1:40:57 to speak and not abuse it first.
1:41:01 But because there’s already a board majority
1:41:03 and my second choice was if there was a problem,
1:41:05 we’d get to this point anyway,
1:41:07 my preference would be to just record it.
1:41:10 There’s no point, there’s no point of live streaming it.
1:41:12 But I do, I just want to throw this out there to you guys,
1:41:15 but also to the public.
1:41:18 There’s still nothing stopping the public from abusing this
1:41:22 by walking up to an agenda for an agenda item
1:41:26 and not speaking on the agenda.
1:41:27 - And then I cut them off. - And then being stopped.
1:41:29 - Correct, and I cut them off.
1:41:30 And so I really hope that people don’t do that.
1:41:35 And again, I’m gonna say it again,
1:41:37 if we get to that point, I hope that this board
1:41:40 is willing to have a conversation about what to do
1:41:42 from that point forward, ‘cause that’s just inappropriate.
1:41:46 - Yeah, I would say there is, it’s not,
1:41:49 I don’t know that I’ve ever seen it be used.
1:41:51 In fact, there were several times over the last couple years
1:41:53 it should have been used, but among the things
1:41:56 that the board chair can stop a speaker for
1:42:01 includes when it’s too lengthy,
1:42:05 obviously that’s when the timer goes off,
1:42:07 personally directed except is allowed above with us, right,
1:42:11 abusive, obscene, or irrelevant.
1:42:15 So if someone comes up to speak to an agenda item
1:42:19 and they start going off another topic,
1:42:21 the chair can stop them for speaking,
1:42:23 for a speech that’s irrelevant.
1:42:25 You know, there’s a couple times in the past–
1:42:26 - But this is written so broadly
1:42:28 that they could apply this probably.
1:42:30 - Well, I’m gonna say that, I’m gonna say it wouldn’t,
1:42:33 because he would stop him not for the language in the book,
1:42:37 but because this is not the agenda item,
1:42:39 so no, it’s something that is already built into our policy.
1:42:44 So if someone, and it’s built, and therefore someone
1:42:46 comes up and starts talking about immigration policy,
1:42:49 the chair should be able to stop him and say,
1:42:50 thank you so much, I appreciate your concern,
1:42:51 but that doesn’t, that’s not relevant here.
1:42:53 We have no control over that.
1:42:55 And we’ve had, I only use that example
1:42:57 ‘cause we had somebody talk about that one time.
1:42:59 That is absolutely an abuse of I want your microphone
1:43:02 and your camera to, you know, to do whatever thing.
1:43:05 But I, you know, Ms. Wright and Ms. Jenkins,
1:43:08 you both mentioned we hope no one would,
1:43:10 but I want you to remember that a few meetings ago,
1:43:14 we had three ladies stand up and read from books
1:43:17 who are already in the process, and so yes,
1:43:19 I would want them to know, hey, the process is going.
1:43:22 These are all very off the shelf,
1:43:23 but yet they were already doing it.
1:43:26 So we’ve already had it happen actually here.
1:43:28 We just didn’t have in place this statute
1:43:31 and this conversation.
1:43:32 So, you know, I–
1:43:36 - Yeah, and I’m only saying that just because
1:43:39 this is complicated and we’ve come to, I’d say,
1:43:43 a compromise and agreement amongst everyone.
1:43:46 And again, my first choice was to let it go
1:43:48 and then to get here, but we’re here,
1:43:49 so let’s talk about it.
1:43:51 But I just want people to be aware of that
1:43:53 so when it happens, it’s not like,
1:43:55 it doesn’t seem like it’s reactionary for me to say,
1:43:57 hey, we need to have this conversation,
1:43:59 because this has always been my true intention.
1:44:01 Regardless of who’s coming up to that microphone
1:44:03 and taking advantage of it, it’s just wrong,
1:44:05 it’s inappropriate.
1:44:06 So I just hope we can be open minded
1:44:08 if we have to get there.
1:44:09 I hope we don’t have to get there.
1:44:11 - So I think we have clear majority for separating them too
1:44:16 and not recording, or I’m sorry,
1:44:18 going to a recording of the non-agenda items.
1:44:21 I think I’m hearing that pretty clear.
1:44:23 I did want to tell everybody my viewpoints.
1:44:26 Florida Statute 610 requires a disclaimer
1:44:29 for any of this FCCC stuff,
1:44:31 and it allows a governmental entity with a disclaimer
1:44:35 to continue to not worry about violating FCCC rules.
1:44:39 Part of the reason that we haven’t seen anything come out
1:44:42 is because there’s that gray area,
1:44:44 but I think moving forward, we should have a disclaimer
1:44:48 in the event that that protects us from any kind
1:44:51 of those governmentals.
1:44:51 So I would say that–
1:44:53 - You mean regardless of what happens?
1:44:55 - Yeah, I’ve just got to have a disclaimer,
1:44:57 and it’s actually inside of some of the scripts,
1:45:00 but it’s not written as a disclaimer.
1:45:02 It’s kind of just like, hey, you got to act correctly.
1:45:05 But as a disclaimer to give us some sort of padding there.
1:45:08 I would say that I’m concerned about us coming forward
1:45:11 with this based upon a single issue.
1:45:14 Going back as long as I have,
1:45:17 we’ve seen so many regarding issues coming up
1:45:21 to change policy based on that.
1:45:23 And I feel very confident that the decision
1:45:25 that you guys made was to move,
1:45:27 separate all non-agenda items,
1:45:29 which is not saying, okay,
1:45:30 ‘cause I was beginning to have a problem
1:45:32 with you guys separating based upon only book challenges.
1:45:36 That would have been kind of the inappropriate way
1:45:38 to do it, I feel.
1:45:40 But I do feel this.
1:45:41 I do feel that I pushed forward a policy
1:45:44 that said that I agreed to let everybody come up,
1:45:47 have their three minutes during the agenda piece
1:45:50 and to let it run.
1:45:51 So that’s where my feelings are,
1:45:53 is that I don’t mind it being live.
1:45:54 I don’t mind it being, I would vote to have it live
1:45:57 and I would vote to have it to where they could speak
1:45:59 at during the agenda items for public speaking.
1:46:03 But I do appreciate your guys’ concern
1:46:05 and I do appreciate you guys separating it.
1:46:08 What I would say is if your concerns are over
1:46:11 some of the stuff happening,
1:46:12 that Paul, we move this policy forward.
1:46:15 It should be a very brief, quick one.
1:46:17 So I don’t know if you can notice it
1:46:18 and bring it forward for conversation.
1:46:21 Are you guys okay with a fast track on this thing happening?
1:46:24 Okay.
1:46:25 - I’ll get it on the next available.
1:46:26 It might not, it’s probably not gonna be the 19th.
1:46:28 So you’re probably looking at October just because.
1:46:30 - Do you feel like you have,
1:46:31 and I’ll give everybody a chance to talk.
1:46:33 I know everybody wants to kind of say something afterwards,
1:46:34 but Paul, do you feel like you have a clear direction
1:46:37 on what you need to put in that policy?
1:46:39 - The only thing that’s missing is are you doing
1:46:41 the two, three minute pieces that I had brought up earlier?
1:46:44 My direction would say to give them
1:46:46 the two, three minute periods.
1:46:48 I’m not gonna split and try to take 2.45 of one
1:46:51 and 15 of another.
1:46:53 If that’s okay with you guys, it would be easier.
1:46:55 - And that’ll make it more difficult for the chair
1:46:57 to stop someone from being irrelevant
1:47:00 if we’re telling them this is the only time
1:47:01 you get to speak.
1:47:02 It does give the opportunity for people
1:47:03 to speak multiple times,
1:47:04 which honestly some people have asked for.
1:47:06 But if they’re willing to stick around
1:47:07 to the end of the talk, a different issue.
1:47:08 But I think we do need to have the chairs gonna need to,
1:47:10 and when I say the chair, don’t think just about you.
1:47:13 - No, no, no, I get it. - Posterity stay.
1:47:15 Whoever is in that role needs to be able
1:47:17 to stop someone for being irrelevant.
1:47:19 And if we make them do it all at once,
1:47:20 they’re not gonna be able to do that.
1:47:22 - I will say this, you guys.
1:47:24 The main thing, and I wanted to make this clear
1:47:26 as far as what I believe in allowing them to come is this,
1:47:29 is that we have sometimes a long meeting
1:47:31 and we have employees that come to speak to us
1:47:34 on specific topics.
1:47:35 And when they have to come up here
1:47:37 and they have to wait until the end of the meeting,
1:47:38 it was kind of hard, you know what I mean?
1:47:40 But to that regard, they also have the availability
1:47:43 to send us an email and to communicate with us,
1:47:45 which is what Ms. Megan was asking for.
1:47:47 So I completely understand that argument too.
1:47:49 So I think we have some clear direction.
1:47:51 Paul, if you can figure out a way to get it
1:47:53 as fast as possible, ‘cause I hear that from the board.
1:47:55 - Can I ask one technical question, Paul, real fast,
1:47:58 ‘cause I don’t know if this needs to be written
1:47:59 into the policy or not.
1:47:59 But the chair has the ability to stop public comment
1:48:05 when it’s, if we change the policy,
1:48:06 as we’re saying, we’re changing the policy,
1:48:08 when a public comment comes forward
1:48:10 and they’re speaking to a non-agenda item
1:48:12 under the agenda item,
1:48:13 the chair has the ability to stop them.
1:48:15 Is there a way to write into policy that after like,
1:48:17 hey, three strikes, you’re out.
1:48:19 So like, they will lose their right
1:48:20 to continue public comment if they don’t.
1:48:22 - No, I wouldn’t.
1:48:23 - I wouldn’t go there.
1:48:24 I would just, like if someone gets up there as mentioned
1:48:27 and wants to read a book during the agenda portion
1:48:31 and it’s not on the agenda, you’re not stopping them.
1:48:34 I think that the chair’s response should be,
1:48:38 excuse me, you’re speaking to a non-agenda topic
1:48:41 during the agenda, do you have an agenda topic
1:48:43 you would like to discuss tonight?
1:48:45 If not, I will move you to the non-agenda portion
1:48:48 and you can come back up and you can read your book
1:48:51 at that time during the scheduled appropriate time
1:48:54 for your comment.
1:48:55 It’s not, we’re not stopping you.
1:48:56 It’s like, this is the agenda portion of the meeting
1:48:59 so that the board can get on with its business.
1:49:01 You’re free to come back at the non-agenda portion.
1:49:05 So I mean, I think that would be the appropriate way to go.
1:49:07 - Just move them to the end.
1:49:08 - Yeah, they would just go and we would just,
1:49:10 he would just put a note out on beside their name,
1:49:12 non-agenda and they would go to the end
1:49:14 of the non-agenda list.
1:49:16 - So also Paul, just so everybody understands,
1:49:19 we don’t have to pass the policy in order to do this.
1:49:22 If you remember when we moved to have this changed
1:49:25 from the last time, I can enact it at the next policy
1:49:29 at the next meeting.
1:49:30 If you guys would like me to move forward with that,
1:49:32 I can have Ms. Lena put that together
1:49:34 and we can move immediately forward with it.
1:49:37 - Well, one of us will need to bring a motion.
1:49:39 - Yes, I’m happy, you know.
1:49:40 - Yeah, at the beginning, I mentioned it,
1:49:42 then you guys bring the motion, then we vote on it,
1:49:44 then we move forward and we can go that route.
1:49:46 - Yeah, and because they’re gonna have to draft
1:49:49 like a new script, I mean, can you put that line in there?
1:49:54 - Yeah, we can make a, the way we did it before
1:49:56 was we put a little spot.
1:49:57 Is there a motion to split agenda?
1:50:00 - Oh no, I’m sorry.
1:50:01 Yeah, I’m sorry, Mr. Susan asked for that already.
1:50:03 I just meant like just another reference point
1:50:05 for Mr. Susan or whoever becomes the chair in November.
1:50:08 - If someone gets up there and reads–
1:50:10 - Just like, you know, when you panic in the moment,
1:50:12 you know, just so it’s right then and there,
1:50:14 so you say the right thing and so we don’t accidentally
1:50:16 stop them when that wasn’t the intention.
1:50:18 - Right. - Yeah.
1:50:19 - And then,
1:50:24 Mr. Broome, you got things from that end
1:50:27 as far as recording and, oh, do you have something
1:50:31 you wanna say?
1:50:34 - Yeah, are you able to answer about the timeline?
1:50:37 - Before I make a statement and a promise,
1:50:40 that’s not possible.
1:50:41 (muffled speaking)
1:50:43 - Yeah, I think it is important just to set expectations
1:50:46 for the board and the public.
1:50:48 Technically, it is not the same to record the public comment
1:50:54 as we do with the board meeting.
1:50:56 The board meeting obviously is on a broadcast channel
1:50:59 and that is live and then it’s played back
1:51:02 along with other meetings, so that will be fine.
1:51:05 Our YouTube channel where we also broadcast is a live
1:51:08 broadcast and so that, once that’s done,
1:51:10 that automatically generates the recorded clip.
1:51:14 In order to record public comment off camera
1:51:19 and during a meeting time, we would use a separate camera
1:51:23 and audio and we would then, after the meeting,
1:51:26 take that file and put an in and out point on it
1:51:30 and obviously no editing and upload it to YouTube
1:51:33 with proper language about what the content is
1:51:37 and that takes a little bit of time.
1:51:39 So if Dr. Rendell would direct me to have my staff do that
1:51:43 after the meeting on Tuesdays or Thursday nights,
1:51:46 we would do that, but it would not be instant.
1:51:48 It would be 30 minutes or so.
1:51:51 - So is it reasonable, though, to say within 24 hours?
1:51:55 - Yes, very much, yeah.
1:51:56 It could be the next morning, it would be better
1:51:59 for everybody’s mindset, but it could be that night
1:52:01 if it’s necessary.
1:52:02 - I don’t want Mike to have to stay an extra hour or two
1:52:04 to get it done the next day is fine.
1:52:07 - The other thing is is that we never used
1:52:09 to record it before.
1:52:10 So at the end, if somebody wanted to come
1:52:12 and give the testimony, you didn’t have to record it.
1:52:14 Like you, we just, that was it.
1:52:16 Like you come speak to us, we wouldn’t have to have Mike
1:52:19 making the recording and all of that stuff.
1:52:20 You don’t have to record non-agended items, that’s all.
1:52:23 - We have always since I’ve been on the board.
1:52:25 - I just, the reason I’m trying to be specific about it
1:52:29 and we don’t have to put an hour on it,
1:52:31 but the reason why I’m trying to make the conversation
1:52:32 specific is we are at a very fragile time
1:52:36 and sensitive time where people are always concerned
1:52:40 like when we lose live stream, they think it’s on purpose.
1:52:44 And so if we can err on the side of being as transparent
1:52:49 as physically possible, or at least when discussing it,
1:52:51 like our intention is to get it out within 24 hours.
1:52:54 I just, I think that’s important.
1:52:56 I don’t think that it needs to literally be a black
1:52:59 and white thing, but just so that as the public listening
1:53:02 to this conversation, they know the intention
1:53:04 is for it to be as soon as possible.
1:53:06 - Right, and if we didn’t want to write in policy,
1:53:08 it shall be, you know.
1:53:10 - Yeah, it would be pretty quick turnaround,
1:53:13 but it does take time.
1:53:14 It’s not as instantaneous as it is on our website,
1:53:17 which is an automated program as well, or it’s live,
1:53:20 so just technical issues there.
1:53:22 - Will you need like a one minute, you know?
1:53:25 - Probably be good to do a break.
1:53:26 - A retestion, yeah. - So we can switch
1:53:27 to cameras.
1:53:28 ‘Cause it would be a little bit distracting
1:53:30 to have the equipment up here during a meeting
1:53:34 for two hours or three hours, and then all of a sudden,
1:53:37 we use it finally.
1:53:38 So I wouldn’t want to do that to the city.
1:53:40 - And one thing, just for the, because you guys,
1:53:42 we changed the, when you guys got on the board,
1:53:45 but just to remind our, us and the new board members,
1:53:49 we will not be able to conduct any business after that.
1:53:52 Like the meeting will pretty much be officially done
1:53:55 when we make that switch.
1:53:57 And so we won’t, you know, it’ll just be listened
1:54:01 to the last handful of people, maybe direct them to staff,
1:54:04 and then we’re done.
1:54:06 - So you kind of answered my question.
1:54:07 I was about to ask, or refreshing my memory.
1:54:10 This happens after board discussion, correct?
1:54:14 So it’s like– - Well, that’s your decision.
1:54:16 I mean, we’ll accommodate anything we can
1:54:19 to the best of our ability.
1:54:20 - Okay, I was just curious, I don’t remember.
1:54:22 Yeah, we were done with like everything.
1:54:27 - Does anybody else have anything else
1:54:29 before the good of the order?
1:54:33 Hearing none, I wanted to mention you guys
1:54:34 that I’ll be asking law enforcement agencies
1:54:37 to review social media to see if anybody broke it
1:54:39 based upon our Vieira situation that we had,
1:54:42 where there was some people posting some stuff,
1:54:45 and anything else that should be good.
1:54:52 (upbeat music)
1:55:27 (silence)