ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA
MINUTES, DECEMBER 12, 2002
The School Board of Escambia County, Florida, convened in Special Meeting at 2:00 p.m., in Room 160, at the J.E. Hall Educational Services Center, 30 East Texar Drive, Pensacola, Florida, with the following present:
Chair: Ms. Linda Finkelstein
Vice Chair: Mr. Gary L. Bergosh
Board Members: Mrs. Cary Stidham
Mr. Ronnie L. Clark
Dr. John DeWitt
School Board Attorney: Mr. Francisco M. Negron, Jr.
Superintendent of Schools: Mr. Jim Paul
(NOTE: Mr. Mike Burns, Legislative Consultant, was also in attendance.)
I. CALL TO ORDER
Ms. Finkelstein called the Special Meeting to order at 2:00 p.m.
II. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
On motion made by Dr. DeWitt and seconded by Mrs. Stidham, adoption of the agenda, was unanimously approved.
III. DEVELOPMENT OF LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL
The School Board of Escambia County, Florida and the Superintendent are committed to increasing the educational opportunities of all our students by allowing our students to increase their knowledge and learning capabilities in the public schools.
The School District of Escambia County is committed to the delivery of a quality education that maintains student accountability and measures academic and vocational success in achievement, articulation and educational efficiency.
We support fully Article IX of the Florida Constitution which states in part, “the education of children is a fundamental value of the people of the State of Florida. It is, therefore, a paramount duty of the state to make adequate provision for the education of all children residing within its borders.
Adequate provision shall be made by law for a uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools that allows students to obtain a high quality education and for the establishment, maintenance, and operation of institutions of higher learning and other public education programs that the needs of the people may require.
In order to fulfil our obligation we strongly encourage our Representatives and Senators to support the following:
1. Dodd Claims Bill – The School District urges the Legislature to strongly oppose the passage of the Dodd Claims Bill (SB 8). The passage of this bill or any similar bill will have a direct adverse impact on educational dollars slated for the classroom in 2003 through 2004. Such legislation will divert $241,000 of general fund dollars away from educational opportunities for the students of the Escambia County School District and was denied both by the State Master and Legislature last year.
2. Recruitment and Retention of Successful Teachers, Administrators and Support Personnel – The School District of Escambia County provided the teachers of our District with one of the largest pay raises in the State of Florida for the 2001-2002 school year, while continuing to work toward increasing the salaries of all staff. The District welcomes the Legislature’s goal of increasing teachers’ salaries in the state to the national average and is supportive of any efforts by the Legislature to provide a statewide insurance network for all employees throughout the State. The District will be steadfast in our efforts to improve teacher salaries in an attempt to attract and retain outstanding personnel to continually improve our workforce. The District welcomes any enhancements in funding that will allow for increases in the base student allocation to fund annual salary increases and opportunities that provide for professional development needs of the District staff. The District’s goal of improving student achievement and accountability will be greatly served by the Legislature’s continued efforts to fund the educational workforce.
The Superintendent requested that the following (partial) statement be deleted from this particular paragraph: “and is supportive of any efforts by the Legislature to provide a statewide insurance network for all employees throughout the State.” He had several concerns of the effect of a statewide insurance network on employees, including the possibility of decreased benefits and increased deductibles. He noted that the he preferred the verbiage in paragraph (5) to the verbiage in this particular paragraph. Motion was made by Dr. DeWitt, seconded by Mrs. Stidham, to deleted the following (partial) statement from this paragraph: “and is supportive of any efforts by the Legislature to provide a statewide insurance network for all employees throughout the State.” Motion was unanimously approved.
3. Flexibility in Allocation and Spending of Funds – The School Board and Superintendent support any and all legislative efforts that allow the District’s maximum flexibility in the allocation and spending of funds appropriated by the Legislature. Within the parameters of the education governance system, school districts are directly accountable to their local communities and should be provided with the opportunity to allocate funding with flexibility at the local level. Local control of funding will allow the District the ability to meet the specific and individual needs of each student and achieve the goal of academic success for all students. The District fully supports the abolishment of “School Recognition Funds,” as these are disruptive and divisive for schools. These funds should be appropriated to the district’s general funds to be used for salaries for all employees.
Mrs. Stidham suggested that the following statements be deleted from this particular paragraph: “The District fully supports the abolishment of ‘School Recognition Funds’, as these are disruptive and divisive for schools. These funds should be appropriated to the district’s general funds to be used for salaries for all employees.” The Superintendent stated that he supported a “return to the first year procedure of providing money to the school to go directly to specific needs of the school as opposed to giving out to individual people.” Dr. DeWitt believed that the statements regarding ‘School Recognition Funds’ were “perfect.” Dr. DeWitt moved for the inclusion of the following statements in this particular paragraph: “The District fully supports the abolishment of ‘School Recognition Funds’, as these are disruptive and divisive for schools. These funds should be appropriated to the district’s general funds to be used for salaries for all employees.” Motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Burns suggested the following statement “The District fully supports legislative efforts to allow the District and recognized schools to determine the use of ‘School Recognition Funds’.” Motion was made by Dr. DeWitt, seconded by Ms. Finkelstein, to include the following statement in this particular paragraph: “The District fully supports legislative efforts to allow the District and recognized schools to determine the use of ‘School Recognition Funds’,” in place of the following two (2) statements: “The District fully supports the abolishment of ‘School Recognition Funds’, as these are disruptive and divisive for schools. These funds should be appropriated to the district’s general funds to be used for salaries of all employees.” Motion was unanimously approved.
4. Inequities in Educational Funding – The District is hopeful the House and Senate will recognize the importance of fully funding growth within the Florida Public Education System. The School District also welcomes attempts by the Legislature to remedy inequities in educational funding throughout the State. Specifically, the School District encourages the Legislature to:
a. Eliminate the cost differential factor from any funding formula applied to school districts across the State.
Mrs. Barbara Linker, Assistant Superintendent for Finance and Business Affairs, explained that the district cost differential is the “cost of living,” and is applied to all FEFP funds and other non-salary funds. She stated that while she would appreciate the elimination of the cost differential factor, realistically, she did not believe that would ever occur. She suggested a request that the cost differential factor only be applied to the average percentage of the portion of the FEFP utilized for salaries. After discussion, motion was made by Dr. DeWitt, seconded by Mr. Clark, to add the following statement to item (a): “Apply the district cost differential factor only to the portion of the FEFP utilized for salaries.” Motion was unanimously approved.
b. Fully fund student health services, school safety and transportation services.
c. Provide full Base Student Allocation (BSA) funds for every Full Time Equivalent (FTE) student.
Mrs. Linker believed that the intent of this particular item was unclear and suggested the following statement instead: “Provide full Base Student Allocation (BSA) funds for all weighted Full Time Equivalent (FTE) students without a District cap.” Motion was made by Mrs. Stidham, seconded by Dr. DeWitt, to revise item (c) to read: “Provide full Base Student Allocation (BSA) funds for all weighted Full Time Equivalent (FTE) students without a District cap.” Motion was unanimously approved.
d. Guarantee annual increases in the BSA to match changes in Florida’s Price Level Index.
Mrs. Linker believed that this particular item should be revised to read: “Guarantee annual increases in the BSA to match or exceed changes in Florida’s Price Level Index.” Motion was made by Mrs. Stidham, seconded by Mr. Clark, to revise item (d) to read: “Guarantee annual increases in the BSA to match or exceed changes in Florida’s Price Level Index.” Motion was unanimously approved.
e. Provide state funding and options to assist school districts in addressing the growing costs of health insurance, including providing the option for school districts to participate in the state group health insurance and prescription drug program.
f. Support a concurrent resolution to amend the Florida Constitution to include the following statement: “The state shall not mandate or assign any new, expanded or modified programs or responsibilities to school districts in such a way as to necessitate additional local expenditures by the school district unless such programs or responsibilities are approved by the local school board.
The Superintendent stated that he opposed the amendment of the Florida Constitution. He also noted that the issue referred to in this particular item was “covered” in paragraph (5), which he believed was “written very well.” Dr. DeWitt and Mrs. Stidham agreed. Motion by Mrs. Stidham, seconded by Mr. Bergosh, to delete item (f) from the legislative proposal, was unanimously approved.
g. Establish a property insurance fund that will provide school districts with coverage for the first $100 million in losses or damages.
h. Raise the cap on the yield of the equalized .25 mill local optional levy from $50 to $75 per FTE.
Mrs. Linker suggested that the following statement be added as an item under paragraph (4): “The School District of Escambia County supports the creation of an FEFP Budget Stabilization Trust Fund that would be used to defray any pro-ration in the budgeted allocation of FEFP funding.” Motion was made by Dr. DeWitt, seconded by Mr. Bergosh, to include the following statement as an item under paragraph (4) of the legislative proposal: “The School District of Escambia County supports the creation of an FEFP Budget Stabilization Trust Fund that would be used to defray any pro-ration in the budgeted allocation of FEFP funding.” Motion was unanimously approved.
5. Unfunded Mandates – The School District encourages the Legislature to cease and abolish all unfunded mandates as they place an extreme hardship on the District during difficult economic times. The District continues to request that the Legislature closely examine legislation that may have an adverse fiscal impact on districts, such as increase service and user fees between different governmental sectors and the implementation of a statewide school calendar, as these should be local decisions.
6. Pre-K Educational Opportunities – The School District is encouraged by the Legislature’s desire to help improve the educational opportunities for children across the State and is supportive of extending Pre-K educational opportunities to all of Florida’s youngest students. The District strongly supports the inclusion of Pre-K into the new seamless education system.
7. The School District of Escambia County continues to oppose all McKay Scholarships, vouchers, tax credits for vouchers, and any plan that continues to deprive public schools of scarce public education dollars.
Mrs. Stidham and the Superintendent both believed that this particular paragraph should be deleted from the legislative proposal. Dr. DeWitt believed that this particular paragraph should be included in the legislative proposal but moved for the following, more positive approach to expressing opposition to vouchers: “The School District of Escambia County continues to oppose all McKay Scholarships and supports the Leon County circuit court decision in Holmes vs. Bush.” Motion was seconded by Mr. Clark. Dr. DeWitt noted that the courts’ decision was that the use of public monies for vouchers to private schools was a violation to the Florida Constitution. In response to comments made, Ms. Finkelstein questioned “why would we assume that they (Northwest Florida Legislative Delegation) are going to be angry with us because this is one position (vouchers) that they may not agree with.” She noted that there were a “number of other things” included in the legislative platform “that they (Northwest Florida Legislative Delegation) can certainly agree with.” She stated that she had never supported vouchers and therefore, could not support the deletion of this particular paragraph. After discussion, Mr. Bob Husbands, Executive Director of NEA UniServe suggested the following statement be included in this particular paragraph: “The School District of Escambia County continues to support full and adequate funding for Florida’s public schools and opposes initiatives, which divert public education dollars from our classrooms.” The Superintendent stated that he was “open” to the statement suggested by Mr. Husbands. Mrs. Stidham offered a substitute motion, to revise paragraph (7) to read “The School District of Escambia County continues to support full and adequate funding for Florida’s public schools and opposes initiatives, which divert public education dollars from our classrooms.” Substitute motion was seconded by Mr. Clark. Mr. Bergosh noted that he was not necessarily opposed to vouchers, noting that he believed “competition is a good thing,” and therefore, would not support the substitute motion. Motion was approved 4 to 1, with Mr. Bergosh voting “No.”
The School Board and Superintendent look forward to working together during the 2003-2004 Legislative Session with our delegation and other members of the Legislature to achieve these and any other initiatives that serve to benefit public education in the State of Florida.
Motion was made by Dr. DeWitt, seconded by Mrs. Stidham, to approve the legislative platform as revised (Supplementary Minute Book, Exhibit “A”). Motion was unanimously approved.
IV. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the Special Meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
Attest: Approved:
Superintendent Chair