|
|||
District Multi-Purpose Center, Corner of Walnut Street & Gratio Place, Green Cove Springs, FL | |||
September 26, 2023 - School Board Workshop | |||
Date: Sep 26 2023
(9:00 a.m.)
|
|||
Invocation (Ashley Gilhousen) | |||
Call to Order (Present: Erin Skipper, District 1; Mary Bolla, District 2; Beth Clark, District 3, Michele Hanson, District 4; Ashley Gilhousen, District 5; and Superintendent David S. Broskie) | |||
Workshop Items | |||
1. Review Draft Agenda for Regular School Board Meeting on October 5, 2023 | |||
October-5-2023-regular-school-board-meeting_agenda_packet (3).pdf | |||
Minutes: Recognitions:
Consent Agenda:
*A recess was taken from 11:10 a.m. to 11:22 a.m.
Discussion Agenda:
|
|||
2. Discussion of Timeline for Review of School Board Policies | |||
Minutes: Mrs. Bolla Indicated that policies should be reviewed with regularity and it may be helpful for the board to review with the superintendent or his designee so board members can learn what the policies are and what revisions may be required, noting that statute changes continuously drive the revisions of applicable policies. She noted that NEOLA does updates on policies for all registered clients, indicating that NEOLA has been considered previously but not retained due to cost. Mr. Blocker noted that staff as well as attorneys should be involved in policy revisions, and he has recommended to the superintendent that this process needs to be done in an organized, disciplined way in order to avoid confusion and frustration among staff. He shared that NEOLA does conduct regular reviews and proposed a continuous review of all policies, to be done in a two-year cycle, with each department bringing recommended and statutory changes to the board for discussion so that all recommendations can be crafted in a legally sufficient, defensible way. As changes occur in legislature and federal case law, flexibility and the need to adjust will be required. Mr. Broskie will meet with staff to establish a timeline to direct the workflow for regular policy review, and Mr. Blocker will be responsible for addressing new legislation requiring action. Mrs. Hanson noted that her biggest concern is not having sufficient conversation about stakeholder input on matters such as cell phones and discipline. The current cost of NEOLA is $142,000., and the board is not interested in incurring that expense at this time. |
|||
3. Review of Current Tobacco Policy and Potential Revisions | |||
Minutes: Mrs. Skipper requested discussion of this topic, stating that current policy re tobacco use has not been updated since 1981 and is very short. She shared a Tobacco-Free K-12 School Model Policy currently used by other Florida counties and indicated the need to do more re vaping. She would like to adopt the policy she submitted as well as discuss what could be done differently or better to take advantage of free services from different organizations for students, obtain signage across campuses, and have organizations come in and speak to students. Laura Fogarty, Director of Climate and Culture, recently met with Tobacco Free Florida, who apologized for putting out some misinformation re board policy. Mrs. Forgarty distributed information highlighting current policy embedded in the Code of Student Conduct and discussed policy as it correlates to the proposed policy. Additional partnerships (Hanley Foundation, Air National Guard, and Clay Action Coalition) are programs currently utilized to provide education on the effects of tobacco. The communication and instruction re how the Code of Conduct is reviewed and communicated to students and parents were discussed. Mrs. Hanson discussed the need for a systematic approach where every student hears the information from a school principal. She likes the clear policy proposed by Mrs. Skipper. Mrs. Gilhousen noted the need to address the attachment issue, indicating that relationship is the reason people turn to substances to fulfill that void and that this is a larger conversation to be had with the community to demonstrate how building relationships will insulate students from these harmful things. Mrs. Skipper indicated a policy is needed to hold individuals accountable (amend board policy) and then allow partners into schools more often to speak to students. Suggestions were also made to have the organizations team up with physical education coaches and include this instruction in science or physical education classes. Mr. Blocker will explore augmenting the Code of Conduct and work with Mr. Broskie and staff to strengthen policy. |
|||
4. Discussion of School Visitations | |||
Minutes: Mrs. Skipper indicated that a lack of a visitor policy has been brought to her attention. She has submitted potential policies to Mr. Blocker and had conversations with him. She advised that a majority of the state has similar policies and implements some degree of background checks for visitors and any individuals that will be around students and that this is needed for student safety. Mr. Blocker noted that there are state statutes that govern this and indicate notification requirements. Mr. Broskie noted that all visitors come to the school front office and go through the Raptor system which determines if the individual is on any registry. Offending parents still have a legal right to their student, and those individuals are escorted to their destination, and specific individuals are monitored. Mr. Blocker advised FS 966.0222 addresses certain types of offenses and the requirements for notification of those individuals as well as supervision guidelines. Additional discussion included requirements for background checks and various restrictions on individuals who have offended. Mrs. Skipper proposed requiring all coaches not employed by the district to have a full Level II background check due to the high potential of them being alone with students. Terri Dennis, Coordinator of Communications, discussed the screening process for volunteers, including cross-referencing names on the predator site and reporting those names to Human Resources, pulling up arrest records in Florida, and placing foreign parents on hold until the issuance of a government ID can be checked. Mr. Broskie would like to see the policies provided by Mrs. Skipper to Mr. Blocker and discuss with Human Resources. |
|||
5. Discussion of Potential Buyout of School Board Attorney (Bickner) Contract | |||
Minutes: Mrs. Hanson appreciated the services of Mr. Blocker and his firm and proposed a buyout of Mr. Bickner's contract so a fresh start may continue with sole reliance on Mr. Blocker. The associated total cost of this proposal is $65,000. Mr. Broskie stressed the importance of transition. Mr. Blocker, in response to a question re the current sufficiency of transition, shared his expectation that Mr. Bickner would continue to finish current district work as he worked with the board on developing relationships and addressing their priorities. He indicated Mr. Bickner's early departure would create some challenges and more time would be helpful but he can work with whatever the board decides. Further discussion included managing the focus of Mr. Bickner's work while not changing the transition timeline and determining a process for evaluating the sufficiency of legal needs approximately 90 days after the transition is complete. *A recess was taken from 1:18 p.m. to 1:25 p.m. |
|||
6. Discussion of Book Challenge Policy and Potential Revisions | |||
Minutes: Roger Dailey, Chief Academic Officer, provided an overview of the current school library book policy and the status of challenged books, indicating that the revisions approved by the board in April 2023 have worked well and are congruent with laws that went into effect on July 1, 2023. If no additional action is taken, constituents will continue to read, at board meetings, things not covered by the statute such as profanity, drug use, and gang violence. The board has overseen the district providing total control to parents. Secondary parents have complete control of what their students can access, making books not accessible to students without written parent permission. To go further in book restriction could be considered a superimposition of other parents' controls. A diverse group of community members has developed a set of community guidelines for library books. This list could be added to existing policy as a filter, but ramifications could be record-setting numbers of removed books, increased media attention, and potential litigation. Currently, policy provides that the board votes not on the books themselves, but on whether the law was appropriately applied by the team responsible for reviewing the books. Mrs. Hanson distributed the Library Media and Instructional Materials Training Transcript to board members. These guidelines were implemented by the Florida Department of Education in April. She reviewed the document, highlighting the goals of materials being age-appropriate (taking into consideration grade levels, maturity, reading levels, etc.), free of bias, having an educational purpose, being relevant to the needs and interests of students, and indicating a need to survey stakeholders for interests and provide an opportunity for input. She does not view having the most banned books as a source of shame and supports being emboldened to do what is right. She believes there are non-pornographic materials that also do not belong on library shelves. She would like to discuss procedural changes in policy and provide guidance for consideration of a rubric that may be used to evaluate reading materials. Mrs. Skipper supports Mrs. Hanson's perspective and doing what is best with tax-payers funding, indicating it is a good idea to ask the public and parents for input. Mrs. Bolla asked if books are being purchased and was advised there is still a freeze on purchasing books. She indicated she has considered the specificity of community limits and input being part of guidelines, not policy, but indicates she does not want to infringe on the rights of parents, who are key and should have the ultimate discretion and authority over their child's reading material. Mrs. Gilhousen appreciates the community standards that have been developed but believes this set of standards should be provided to media specialists, at that level, rather than being included in policy, giving media specialists the opportunity to de-select books at the school level. Mr. Blocker advised the purpose of the statute was to get obscene materials away from children and that the legislature had the option to go further but chose not to. The legislature has placed the responsibility of this matter with the board. Current policy is effective as far as keeping the board removed to a certain point. He encouraged the board to think about whether they want to modify current policy by incorporating community standards, allowed for by statute and legally defensible, but which may create additional opportunities to be challenged. Adopting community standards that have not been fully vetted through the court system may bring litigation and associated costs. He will review the policy to assess the need for any revisions, avoiding community standards, but making layers of echelon below the board to protect them. He recommended time to absorb and research. Board members will email any input to Mr. Blocker. Any guidelines should be developed by the superintendent and staff, with the board having input, because this procedure has to do with operational function. In the course of scheduling additional discussion on this topic, Mrs. Gilhousen indicated that she would contact Sheriff Cook to obtain information and determine whether a presentation would be made for consideration on a different matter. |
|||
7. Lunch Break (Recess) as Necessary | |||
Minutes: A lunch break was not taken. The board took a recess from 11:10 a.m. to 11:22 a.m. and a recess from 1:18 p.m. to 1:25 p.m. |
|||
Questions from the Audience | |||
8. Questions From the Audience | |||
Minutes: Victoria Kidwell, President, Clay County Education Association, expressed concern re the proposed dissemination of guidelines to media specialists that may be interpreted differently and if guidance would be provided to bring greater clarity as individual judgements may differ. |
|||
Superintendent Comments | |||
9. Superintendent Comments | |||
Minutes: Mr. Broskie advised Clay Day will be held in January and requested the board give thought to legislative priorities to be discussed at the October workshop. |
|||
School Board Attorney Comments (None) | |||
School Board Comments | |||
10. School Board Member Comments | |||
Minutes: Mrs. Hanson requested clarification from Mr. Broskie re whether the instruction of 7 Mindsets is mandatory. Mr. Broskie responded that a school leadership team may determine this curriculum should be utilized. Mrs. Skipper requested an update on transportation. Mr. Broskie indicated there are currently approximately five (5) doubleback routes due to drivers leaving, eight (8) drivers out on FML, eleven (11) trainees (3-4 weeks training process), and nine (9) interviews completed, currently in the Human Resources process. Mrs. Hanson asked about double-ups (seat sharing) and Mr. Broskie advised that is not typically done and he will look into that. Mrs. Skipper suggested each department research systems that can accomplish multiple things so it doesn't take large amounts of staff's time to supply board members with requested documentation and to condense programs as a cost savings measure. |
|||
Adjournment (3:25 p.m.) | |||
|