1. District Representatives (GD)
1.1. Ronald Blocker Superintendent
2. Board Meeting Agenda (GD)
2.1. Strategic Update (GD)
2.1.1. Finacial Representative discusses the state of the District's financial affairs with the Board and community (GD)
2.1.1.1. KEY DRIVERS OF ECONOMIC QUALITY
2.1.1.2. ECONOMIC STRENGTH, FINANCIAL GROWTH,MANAGEMENT & GOVERNENCE, DEBT PROFILE-DG
2.2. Public Hearing (GD)
2.2.1. During this portion of the meeting several policies were reviewed, revised, and changes/updates were accepted by the Board (GD)
2.3. Consent (GD)
2.3.1. Rev. Bracie NAACP-guest speaker (GD)
2.3.1.1. The OCPS, working in conjunction with their representative of the local chapter of the NAACP, have come to a settlement and made a commitment to the students of Orange County to grant superior education to all of its students and that all of the District students can succeed and will succeed regardless of race, creed or color (GD)
2.3.2. Mr. Cahill Race To The Top-guest speaker (GD)
2.3.2.1. Reviewed concerns for funding and the ability to maintain the financial burdern DG
2.4. Non-consent (GD)
2.4.1. Mr. Vanier presents Charter School applications for approval or denial - Mr. Vanier lists reasons for approval or denial (GD) Mr. Vanier provided thorough information about each charter school. He patiently answered everyone's questions, including Ms. Gordon's. - H.S.
2.4.1.1. West Orange Montessori Charter (K-8)- application approved (GD)
2.4.1.2. Orange County Charter - application approved (GD)
2.4.1.3. Transitions Special Education Charter (9-12) - application approved (GD)
2.4.1.4. Odessy Charter (K-8) - application approved (GD)
2.4.1.5. Transitions Special Education (Autism) Charter (6-12) - application approved (GD)
2.4.1.6. Einstein Montessori Charter (K-5) - application approved (GD)
2.4.1.7. Kid's Community College Charter (K-5) - application approved (GD)
2.4.1.8. Maverick's High Charter (9-12) - application denied (GD)
2.4.1.8.1. Representatives from the Maverick Charter School were present at the meeting. Each person responded for approx. 3 minutes to concerns the Board had with their application. The issues of concern with their application had caused the denial of their charter. Therefore, the focus of each speaker was to address the Board's concerns, which included a 501C3, a typo in their application, and the time span of their repayment. After responses were given, a board member (Rick Roach) moved to approve the motion. Other members of the Board, mainly Kat Gordon, did not concede. She was very adamant about the fact that the Mavericks Charter School did not present themselves well at a work session and that was their chance to bring their best. Joie Cadle, also felt they should be denied because of the typos in their application and lack of professionalism. She recommended that they reapply for a charter next school year. After voting, the Board voted 5-2 to deny the application.- H.S. It appeared to me that the Board was already convinced that this Charter School was not prepared. Ms. Gordon felt it was a slap in the face to their District to come unprepared. Some of the Board members thought it was a lack of respect to have a typo and other issues not addressed. (ER)
2.4.1.9. Alaphea Charter (K-8) - application denied (GD)
2.4.1.10. Orlando Science Charter (K-5) - application denied (GD)
2.4.1.10.1. Several speakers attended the Board meeting to dispute the denial of Orlando Science Charter. The speakers included parents of children currently enrolled at the middle school, students, board members, and others. Arthur Santos was a middle school student who spoke very eloquently about his concern that younger children (including his younger sister) have the opportunity to attend a school like Orlando Science Charter in grades K-5. After hearing the speakers, Vicky Bell moved to approve the Orlando Science Charter and the motion was seconded by Daryl Flynn despite the financial difficulties that exist in their current middle school. After a disucssion and a roll call vote, 1 person approved it and 5 denied it due to concerns regarding their budget deficit that exists in their current charter school. -H.S. The amount of parents, teachers, and students who came to advocate for their school was outstanding. (ER)
2.4.1.11. Pivot Charter (6-12) - application denied (GD)
2.4.1.11.1. The Pivot Charter was not providing a research-based reading program and I feel that this is the one reason why they were denied. (ER)
3. Meet the Board (GD)
3.1. Joie Cadle (D1) Chair
3.1.1. Ms. Cadle is a person who is extremely focus to detail. (ER)
3.2. Christine Moore (D7) Vice Chair
3.2.1. Ms. Moore was willing to table the Maverick Charter School to give them the opportunity to make the needed changes for approval. (ER)
3.3. Daryl Flynn (D2)
3.4. Rick Roach (D3)
3.4.1. Attended the meeting via phone. He had to leave the meeting as of 7:56 PM. -H.S.
3.4.1.1. Great to see that districts are willing to utilize technology to allow Board Members to attend meetings via technology:DG
3.4.2. Ms. Bell was in favor of Orlando Science Charter School. She worked to help the board member that Ms. Gordon was questioning, explain the cause of the budget deficit in the existing school. She explained that with their first charter their building was bigger than needed for the amount of students they ended up enrolling. This time, they have the studnets first and will get a building to accomodate that number. This will keep costs under control. Budget deficits, according to Ms. Bell, could've been from the cost of the large building. -H.S.
3.5. Vicky Bell (D4)
3.6. Kat Gordon (D5)
3.6.1. Ms. Gordon was a very opinionated board member. She had strong personal beliefs, views, and opinions throughout the board meeting. At times she was somewhat confrontational. Her courage in voicing her opinion shows her commitment to this school board, however at times she seemed rude, impatient, misinformed, condescending and stubborn. The questions were asked and were relevant, but Ms. Gordon rarely listened to the speakers' responses to address her valid concerns. -H.S.