School Board Workshop

Page 1 Minutes June 16, 2022 Workshop 9:00 AM Manatee County School District 215 Manatee Avenue West Bradenton, FL 34205 www.manateeschools.net Times Indicated Are Approximate I) CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Status Charlie Kennedy, Board Member Cynthia Saunders, Superintendent Doug Wagner, Deputy Superintendent of Operations Gina Messenger, Vice-Chair James Golden, Chair Mary Foreman, Board Member Stephen Dye, School Board Attorney Tim Bargeron, Deputy Superintendent of Business Services Chad Choate, Board Member Present Mitchell Teitelbaum, General Counsel Dan Evans, Deputy Superintendent of Instruction Absent Minutes: Chair Golden called the Workshop to order at 9:02 AM and announced that Board Member Kennedy had joined the Workshop virtually. II) WORKSHOP 1. School Concurrency, Land Holdings and Impact Fees Update Minutes: Mr. Joe Ranaldi, Chief Operations Officer, stated that two documents are utilized for school planning. He spoke regarding the documents, the standing Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning between the four municipalities within Manatee County and the Manatee County Impact Fee Ordinance. Mr. Mike Pendley, Executive Planner, utilized the attached presentation and spoke regarding the following: • School Concurrency • Vacant Land Ownership • Future Land Ownership • Impact Fees The Board asked questions throughout the presentation. Chair Golden requested that the individuals representing the Board in the impact fee discussions keep in mind the concerns of staffing needs as well as the desire to assist the families that most need relief. Mr. Pendley updated the Board on Manatee County’s Impact Fee discussions.

Chair Golden asked if the information necessary to develop a draft of a resolution would be available by the first meeting in August. Superintendent Saunders stated that the District could have the proposed language for a resolution in first meeting in August and noted that the final document would not be available if the County had not finished. She stated that Mr. Dye and Mr. Pendley could work on the language for the resolution. 2. Overview of the 2022-2023 Budget | General Fund Minutes: Mr. Tim Bargeron, Deputy Superintendent of Business Services, summarized the previous workshops regarding the budget. He utilized the attached presentation and provided supplemental handouts containing the information from the presentation. He discussed the following: • 2022-2023 Budget Preparation • Fund Balance History • Fund Balance Requirements • Fund Balance Projections • Year to Year Expense Change by Program • Future Meetings The Board asked questions throughout the presentation. Board Member Foreman expressed concerns regarding the reserve fund. She requested the Board consider raising the target for the reserve fund amount. The Board held discussion regarding the reserve funds. Superintendent Saunders commended the Finance Team for reaching the highest reserve fund the District has had. Following a question from Board Member Choate, Mr. Bargeron explained ESSER funds. The Board held discussion regarding scholarship vouchers. Chair Golden requested the topic be addressed when the Board discusses what they would like to advocate for through the Florida School Boards Association and what the Board will ask the legislative delegation to be advocating for on their behalf. Chair Golden announced a recess at 11:00 AM and reconvened at 11:09 AM. 3. Citizens' Financial Oversight Committee Presentation Minutes: Mr. David Ballard, Chair of the Citizen’s Financial Oversight Committee (CFOC), presented the attached Annual Report from the CFOC to the Board. Following a comment from Mr. Ballard, Chair Golden inquired about the recommendation to improve the data collection regarding employee fill rates. Superintendent Saunders discussed specifics regarding the HR System and noted that the HR systems for a school district are built based on how many positions are needed and how many are filled and unfilled. She stated that staff would need to ask the vendor if they could program the system in a fashion to track employees individually. The Board held discussion regarding measuring teacher retention. Ms. Pat Barber, President of the Manatee Education Association, spoke regarding retention rates and stated that both of the Bargaining Units have seniority lists which could be merged to attain the data that is being requested. The Board Members thanked Mr. Ballard and expressed appreciation for the work of the Committee. Page 2

Also in attendance were the following Committee Members: Ms. Donna Fredricksen, Ms. Cynthia Howard, Mr. Tom Ehren, and Ms. Pat Barber. Board Member Kennedy thanked Mr. Ballard for his service to the School District. Chair Golden moved forward on the Agenda to Public Comment. 4. Discussion of Citizens' Financial Oversight Committee (CFOC) Minutes: Board Member Foreman spoke regarding options to improve the functioning of the Citizens’ Financial Oversight Committee (CFOC). She recommended having Carr, Riggs & Ingram (CRI) conduct an audit and have the CFOC function in a similar fashion to the Audit Committee. She spoke regarding membership appointments to the Committee and noted the importance of defining eligibility and the process. She discussed the members on the Committee from the unions and questioned whether they should be voting members. Vice-Chair Messenger spoke regarding the history of the CFOC. She expressed concerns with the cost of hiring an auditor and noted the differences between the CFOC and the Audit Committee. She spoke in support of having the liaison interview applicants for membership and discussed additional appointment options including recruiting members of community organizations. She stated that the goal of the union members was the same as the goal of the Committee and did not see a conflict of interest allowing them to be voting members. She requested clarification regarding Board Member Foreman’s proposal to hire CRI to conduct an audit. Board Member Foreman stated that the finances would be audited, and the outcomes would be accumulated. She provided additional details and examples. Board Member Kennedy spoke in support of having a basic audit report done by an external audit firm for the Committee to utilize. Board Member Choate spoke regarding the CFOC and expectations of the Committee. He spoke regarding the importance for the Board to monitor the Committee and ensure the Committee is completing the task as charged. Chair Golden requested quarterly updates from the Citizens’ Financial Oversight Committee. He commended Mr. Ballard and the Committee on the Report they provided. He made a commitment to ensure the Committee that the vacancies that exist will be filled with the appropriate individuals that do not have their own agenda. Vice-Chair Messenger expressed concerns with the frequency of the updates from the Committee. She requested the language be specific to prevent the Committee from spending time creating something the Board is not wanting. Chair Golden clarified that he would like to give the Committee the opportunity to come before the Board prior to the annual Report from the Committee. Board Member Foreman spoke regarding the terms for the membership of the CFOC and noted that there would be openings. She discussed the role of the liaison and requested guidance. She suggested individuals with education, finance, arts, and STEM backgrounds be considered for membership. She stated that the union members should hold non-voting positions. Chair Golden requested to add his withdrawn item from the June 14, 2022 Meeting to the June 28, 2022 Meeting for the consideration of an individual to fill the remainder of the term for the vacant seat on the CFOC. Ms. Fredricksen addressed the Board and spoke in support of having an occasional audit conducted. Page 3

Page 4 Superintendent Saunders clarified that the State audits the District every three years and is currently in the process of an operational audit. III) PUBLIC COMMENTS Minutes: Following Workshop item, Citizens' Financial Oversight Committee Presentation, the Board heard Public Comments. Public Comment as follows: 1. Michael Hartman 2. Norman Nelson Following Public Comment, Superintendent Saunders spoke regarding the thirty minutes of instructional time that was added for students and noted that half of the learning time was taken out of non-instructional time and was negotiated through the Manatee Education Association. IV) ADJOURNMENT Minutes: Chair Golden adjourned the Workshop at 12:40 PM. ______________________________ ______________________________ Cynthia Saunders, Ex Officio Secretary Rev. James T. Golden and Superintendent of Schools Chairman NOTICE Any person who desires to appeal any decision made by the School Board with respect to any matter considered at the above-mentioned meeting will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which an appeal may be based. School Board meetings are held in accessible locations. Auxiliary aids will be provided, upon written request received at least 48 hours prior to the meeting, to participants with disabilities.

I. CALL TO ORDER II. WORKSHOP 1. School Concurrency, Land Holdings and Impact Fees Update 2. Overview of the 2022-2023 Budget | General Fund 3. Citizens' Financial Oversight Committee Presentation 4. Discussion of Citizens' Financial Oversight Committee (CFOC) III. PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comment is not an open forum to discuss matters unrelated to education, to support or oppose candidates for public office, or to engage in commercial speech attempting to sell a service or product to the School Board or public. Also, public comment is not a forum to attack individual school system employees or Board Members. Any such complaints should be submitted in writing to the Superintendent for appropriate handling. Finally, this is not a forum for addressing issues involving individual students. Because of privacy concerns, such issues should be submitted in writing to the Superintendent for appropriate handling. Each speaker is allowed three minutes to address the Board. Speakers must stand at the podium and not approach the dais. This is a business meeting of the School Board and the public expects that we conduct it in an orderly, efficient, effective and dignified manner. We request that speakers keep this in mind when making your comments. We also request that the audience keep that in mind and not demonstrate approval or disapproval of what a speaker has said by clapping or booing. The Board appreciates the public's input and will listen attentively, consider each comment, and usually will not respond, enter into debate, or answer questions during comments on agenda items or during the public comments section. PUBLIC INPUT INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Before you begin speaking, please provide any handouts to the Agency Clerk. 2. Please identify yourself only by your full name for the record. 3. You have no more than three minutes to speak. Please stop speaking when the bell rings. 4. Florida Law requires all citizens to conduct themselves in an orderly fashion at public meetings. 5 . WARNING: Any individual who interferes with the expeditious or orderly process of a School Board meeting, will be subject to removal from the meeting pursuant to Section 1001.372(3) Florida Agenda June 16, 2022 School Board of Manatee County Workshop - 9:00 AM Walter Miller School Support Center Board Room Times Indicated are Approximate 1

Statutes at the discretion of the Chair. Orderly fashion is deemed as, at a minimum (1) no profanity (2) no vulgar language (3) no discourteous, disrespectful, or disparaging conduct. IV. ADJOURNMENT 2

I. CALL TO ORDER II. WORKSHOP 1. School Concurrency, Land Holdings and Impact Fees Update 2. Overview of the 2022-2023 Budget | General Fund 3. Citizens' Financial Oversight Committee Presentation 4. Discussion of Citizens' Financial Oversight Committee (CFOC) III. PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comment is not an open forum to discuss matters unrelated to education, to support or oppose candidates for public office, or to engage in commercial speech attempting to sell a service or product to the School Board or public. Also, public comment is not a forum to attack individual school system employees or Board Members. Any such complaints should be submitted in writing to the Superintendent for appropriate handling. Finally, this is not a forum for addressing issues involving individual students. Because of privacy concerns, such issues should be submitted in writing to the Superintendent for appropriate handling. Each speaker is allowed three minutes to address the Board. Speakers must stand at the podium and not approach the dais. This is a business meeting of the School Board and the public expects that we conduct it in an orderly, efficient, effective and dignified manner. We request that speakers keep this in mind when making your comments. We also request that the audience keep that in mind and not demonstrate approval or disapproval of what a speaker has said by clapping or booing. The Board appreciates the public's input and will listen attentively, consider each comment, and usually will not respond, enter into debate, or answer questions during comments on agenda items or during the public comments section. PUBLIC INPUT INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Before you begin speaking, please provide any handouts to the Agency Clerk. 2. Please identify yourself only by your full name for the record. 3. You have no more than three minutes to speak. Please stop speaking when the bell rings. 4. Florida Law requires all citizens to conduct themselves in an orderly fashion at public meetings. 5 . WARNING: Any individual who interferes with the expeditious or orderly process of a School Board meeting, will be subject to removal from the meeting pursuant to Section 1001.372(3) Florida Agenda June 16, 2022 School Board of Manatee County Workshop - 9:00 AM Walter Miller School Support Center Board Room Times Indicated are Approximate 1

Statutes at the discretion of the Chair. Orderly fashion is deemed as, at a minimum (1) no profanity (2) no vulgar language (3) no discourteous, disrespectful, or disparaging conduct. IV. ADJOURNMENT 2

AGENDA ITEM NO. II.1 School Board of Manatee County June 16, 2022 - Workshop Title School Concurrency, Land Holdings and Impact Fees Update Executive Summary Executive Planner, Mr. Mike Pendley, will present information regarding school concurrency, land holdings and impact fees. Contact Submitting Department: Construction Services Initiated By: Michael Pendley Attachments: Board Workshop 6.16.22 School Concurrency 3

SCHOOL CONCURRENCY, LAND HOLDINGS AND IMPACT FEES Presented By: Michael Pendley Executive Planner, Department of Construction Services June 16, 2022 4

SCHOOL CONCURRENCY • The SDMC has implemented school concurrency. The intent of school concurrency is to ensure that adequate school capacity is in place to serve new residential growth. • Complex tracking system that utilizes: • existing school capacities • capacity projects on the five-year capital plan • student generation rates by dwelling unit type • reserved residential approvals • encumbered residential approvals • proposed residential approvals • certificates of occupancy 5

SCHOOL CONCURRENCY 6

SCHOOL CONCURRENCY – May 2022 7

SCHOOL CONCURRENCY - May 2022 8

VACANT LAND OWNERSHIP MTC West Campus – 25 acres – Intended Use is Elementary, Middle or K-8 PSC Outparcel – 5 acres – No Intended Use Braden River High – 44 acres – Intended Use is Elementary, Middle or K-8 – Current BRHS Agriculture Rangeland Parkway – 102 acres – Intended Use is High School Academic Avenue – 40 acres – Intended Use is K-8 Duette Elementary – 15 Acres – No Intended Use 6 5 3 41 2 6 5 4 3 2 1 9

FUTURE LAND OWNERSHIP Artisan Lakes – 20 acres – Intended Use is Elementary Haval Farms – 30 acres – Intended Use is Middle SMR Taylor Ranch – 20 acres – Intended Use is Elementary 3 1 2 3 2 1 10

IMPACT FEES • Manatee County uses the following dwelling unit size tiers, regardless of dwelling unit type • 1,000 sq. ft. or less • 1,001-1,300 sq. ft. • 1,301-1,700 sq. ft. • 1,701-2,200 sq. ft. • 2,201-or more sq. ft. • The School Impact fees are assessed by the following dwelling unit types, regardless of size • Single Family • Townhouse/Duplex • Multifamily • Manufactured Home 11

IMPACT FEES • If sufficient data is available, the recommendation by the SDMC consultant will most likely follow the size tiers regardless of dwelling unit type model used by Manatee County • If sufficient data is available, Manatee County’s impact fee consultant and the SDMC impact fee consultant will work together to develop dwelling unit size tiers for smaller dwelling units that are under 1,000 sq. ft. (ex – ADU’s and half dwelling units) 12

IMPACT FEES • Florida Statutes 163.31801 is the Florida Impact Fee Act • 163.31801(11) states “A county, municipality, or special district may provide an exception or waiver for an impact fee for the development or construction of housing that is affordable, as defined in s. 420.9071. If a county, municipality, or special district provides such an exception or waiver, it is not required to use any revenues to offset the impact.” • School Board does not have that ability but may make a recommendation through a resolution 13

QUESTIONS 14

AGENDA ITEM NO. II.2 School Board of Manatee County June 16, 2022 - Workshop Title Overview of the 2022-2023 Budget | General Fund Executive Summary Mr. Tim Bargeron, Deputy Superintendent of Business Services, will present an overview of the 2022-2023 Budget regarding the General Fund. Contact Submitting Department: Budget Initiated by: Tim Bargeron Attachments: General Fund Budget Workshop 2022-2023 15

Budget 2022-23 General Fund, Workshop III School District of Manatee County, Fl June 16, 2022 Presented by: Tim Bargeron, Deputy Superintendent of Business Services 1 16

Agenda • Budget workshops – 2022-23 • Fund balances • Appropriations • Future meetings and public hearings 2 17

2022-23 Budget Preparation • 05/10/2022 Board Workshop – FEFP Revenues, 1st Calculation • 05/13/2022 Board Workshop – Staffing Plan 3 18

Fund Balance History 4 Total Nonspendable Combined FB % of Fiscal Year Fund Balance Inventory Restricted Assigned Unassigned Assign/Unassign Revenue Revenue 05-06 $15,230,488 $502,400 $1,418,451 $4,511,189 $8,798,448 $13,309,637 4.87% $273,169,330 06-07 $11,920,032 $435,949 $640,817 $1,103,879 $9,739,387 $10,843,266 3.56% $304,332,555 07-08 $8,066,211 $452,003 $1,344,442 $998,738 $5,271,028 $6,269,766 1.98% $317,387,551 08-09 $11,391,193 $389,949 $405,126 $1,056,920 $9,539,198 $10,596,118 3.43% $308,714,494 09-10 $10,870,441 $452,212 $163,742 $1,128,208 $9,126,279 $10,254,487 3.50% $293,289,240 10-11 $6,794,087 $1,687,831 $132,154 $1,579,405 $3,394,697 $4,974,102 1.65% $300,722,362 11-12 -$3,458,661 $460,237 $208,430 $0 -$4,127,328 -$4,127,328 -1.40% $295,243,037 12-13 -$7,503,057 $950,536 $180,838 $0 -$8,634,431 -$8,634,431 -2.80% $308,347,961 13-14 $14,411,381 $730,723 $2,614,303 $973,008 $10,093,347 $11,066,355 3.32% $333,033,399 14-15 $17,348,150 $743,221 $2,409,971 $2,877,127 $11,317,831 $14,194,958 4.11% $345,289,263 15-16 $16,189,118 $738,001 $2,036,469 $4,815,340 $8,599,308 $13,414,648 3.72% $360,429,470 16-17 $25,562,074 $680,710 $6,759,806 $5,294,697 $12,826,861 $18,121,558 4.92% $368,183,816 17-18 $30,240,826 $647,626 $8,955,032 $4,840,580 $15,797,588 $20,638,168 5.44% $379,074,775 18-19 $39,214,896 $621,256 $16,751,415 $5,765,591 $16,076,634 $21,842,225 5.02% $435,331,110 19-20 $29,018,719 $589,122 $11,747,589 $5,877,706 $10,804,302 $16,682,008 3.84% $434,787,105 20-21 $42,260,186 $865,221 $12,717,762 $4,917,554 $23,759,649 $28,677,203 6.37% $450,146,842 21-22 Estimate $51,078,661 $865,222 $13,667,370 $6,369,766 $30,176,303 $36,546,069 8.08% $452,431,754 19

Fund Balance Requirements 5 1011.051 Guidelines for general funds.—The district school board shall maintain a general fund ending fund balance that is sufficient to address normal contingencies. (1) If at any time the portion of the general fund’s ending fund balance not classified as restricted, committed, or nonspendable in the district’s approved operating budget is projected to fall below 3 percent of projected general fund revenues during the current fiscal year, the superintendent shall provide written notification to the district school board and the Commissioner of Education. If such financial condition exists for 2 consecutive fiscal years, the superintendent shall reduce the district’s administration expenditures reported pursuant to s. 1010.215(4)(a) in proportion to the reduction in the general fund’s ending balance or the reduction in student enrollment, whichever is greater. (2)(a) If at any time the portion of the general fund’s ending fund balance not classified as restricted, committed, or nonspendable in the district’s approved operating budget is projected to fall below 2 percent of projected general fund revenues during the current fiscal year, the superintendent shall provide written notification to the district school board and the Commissioner of Education. 20

Fund Balance Projections 06/30/2022 6 2021-22 Fiscal Year Estimate Fund Balance July 1, 2021 42,260,185.69 +General Fund Revenues 452,431,753.68 +Transfers/Other Financing Sources 20,145,533.20 Total Revenues 472,577,286.88 -General Fund Expenditures 463,758,811.10 Net Change in Fund Balance 8,818,475.78 Total Ending Fund Balance June 30, 2022 51,078,661.47 Ending Fund Balance: Nonspendable - Inventory 865,221.81 Restricted - State (Categorical, etc.) 713,000.00 Restricted - Grants 150,000.00 Restricted - MTC 9,804,370.13 Restricted - Millage 3,000,000.00 13,667,370.13 Total Restricted Assigned - Millage 1,369,766.37 Assigned - Encumbrances 1,200,000.00 Assigned - Programs 3,800,000.00 6,369,766.37 Total Assigned Unassigned 30,176,303.16 Assigned/Unassigned 3% Required FB Total Ending Fund Balance June 30, 2022 51,078,661.47 36,546,069.53 13,572,952.61 Total Assigned/Unassigned Unassigned Fund Balance % 11.29% 8.08% 6.67% 21

Y2Y Expense Change by Program (Unassigned) 7 Description Sum of 2022 Current Budget Sum of TSIA Sum of FRS Sum of $15 Min Benefits $68,910,475.02 $616,357.20 $2,157,231.05 $417,557.31 Salaries $198,539,188.40 $3,141,337.25 $2,134,751.00 Professional & Tech $13,529,931.25 Insurance and Bond Premiums $3,718,800.07 Travel $210,448.93 Repairs & Maint $1,476,826.54 Rentals/Rentals SW $2,334,852.12 Phone/Postage $477,594.24 Utilities $15,089,765.05 Charter $43,961,962.07 Oth Purchased Srv/Contract Sites $3,559,033.73 Printing $694,966.57 Supplies $1,046,208.06 Textbooks $25,409.17 Repairs/Tires/Oil Grease $520,546.28 Food $60,593.35 Other Expenses $1,143,811.34 Library Books $2,024.47 Capitalized/Non-Cap $1,459,051.65 Part-Time Hourly Employees $3,669,544.42 Charter School State CO $3,868,382.00 Grand Total $364,299,414.73 $3,757,694.45 $2,157,231.05 $2,552,308.31 22

Y2Y Expense Change by Program (Unassigned) 8 Description Sum of 2022 Current Budget Sum of Raises Sum of Staffing Changes Sum of Utility Changes Benefits $68,910,475.02 $364,887.13 $837,397.84 Salaries $198,539,188.40 $1,921,048.43 $2,460,763.57 Professional & Tech $13,529,931.25 Insurance and Bond Premiums $3,718,800.07 Travel $210,448.93 Repairs & Maint $1,476,826.54 Rentals/Rentals SW $2,334,852.12 Phone/Postage $477,594.24 Utilities $15,089,765.05 $890,726.48 Charter $43,961,962.07 Oth Purchased Srv/Contract Sites $3,559,033.73 Printing $694,966.57 Supplies $1,046,208.06 Textbooks $25,409.17 Repairs/Tires/Oil Grease $520,546.28 Food $60,593.35 Other Expenses $1,143,811.34 Library Books $2,024.47 Capitalized/Non-Cap $1,459,051.65 Part-Time Hourly Employees $3,669,544.42 $67,584.37 Charter School State CO $3,868,382.00 Grand Total $364,299,414.73 $2,353,519.93 $3,298,161.41 $890,726.48 23

Y2Y Expense Change by Program (Unassigned) 9 Description Sum of 2022 Current Budget Sum of Charter School LWRP Sum of Scholarships Sum of Budget 2022-23 Benefits $68,910,475.02 $73,303,905.55 Salaries $198,539,188.40 $208,197,088.65 Professional & Tech $13,529,931.25 $209,615.00 $13,739,546.25 Insurance and Bond Premiums $3,718,800.07 $3,718,800.07 Travel $210,448.93 $210,448.93 Repairs & Maint $1,476,826.54 $1,476,826.54 Rentals/Rentals SW $2,334,852.12 $2,334,852.12 Phone/Postage $477,594.24 $477,594.24 Utilities $15,089,765.05 $15,980,491.53 Charter $43,961,962.07 $5,241,892.00 $49,203,854.07 Oth Purchased Srv/Contract Sites $3,559,033.73 $3,559,033.73 Printing $694,966.57 $694,966.57 Supplies $1,046,208.06 $1,046,208.06 Textbooks $25,409.17 $25,409.17 Repairs/Tires/Oil Grease $520,546.28 $520,546.28 Food $60,593.35 $60,593.35 Other Expenses $1,143,811.34 $1,143,811.34 Library Books $2,024.47 $2,024.47 Capitalized/Non-Cap $1,459,051.65 $1,459,051.65 Part-Time Hourly Employees $3,669,544.42 $3,737,128.79 Charter School State CO $3,868,382.00 $3,868,382.00 Grand Total $364,299,414.73 $5,241,892.00 $209,615.00 $384,760,563.37 24

Fund Balance Projections 06/30/2023 10 2022-23 Fiscal Year Estimate Fund Balance July 1, 2022 51,078,661.47 +General Fund Revenues 497,064,711.74 +Transfers/Other Financing Sources 19,614,134.00 Total Revenues 516,678,845.74 -General Fund Expenditures 526,420,759.31 Net Change in Fund Balance (9,741,913.57) Total Ending Fund Balance June 30, 2022 41,336,747.90 Ending Fund Balance: Nonspendable - Inventory 865,221.81 Restricted - State (Categorical, etc.) 500,000.00 Restricted - Grants 150,000.00 Restricted - MTC 3,000,000.00 Restricted - Millage 2,000,000.00 5,650,000.00 Total Restricted Assigned - Millage 1,504,089.45 Assigned - Encumbrances 1,200,000.00 Assigned - Programs 3,300,000.00 6,004,089.45 Total Assigned Unassigned 28,817,436.64 Assigned/Unassigned 3% Required FB Total Ending Fund Balance June 30, 2023 41,336,747.90 34,821,526.09 14,911,941.35 Total Assigned/Unassigned Unassigned Fund Balance % 8.32% 7.01% 5.80% 25

Future Meetings • 7/21/2022 Board meeting - Approve Budget for Advertising • 07/26/2022 Public Hearing, Tentative Millages and Budget • 08/26/2022 Workshop, Capital Outlay • 09/06/2022 Public Hearing, Final 2021-22 Millages and Budget 11 26

Questions? 12 27

AGENDA ITEM NO. II.3 School Board of Manatee County June 16, 2022 - Workshop Title Citizens' Financial Oversight Committee Presentation Executive Summary Members of the Citizens' Financial Oversight Committee will present the Fiscal Year 2021 Annual Report to the Board. Contact Submitting Department: School Board Attachments: FY 2021 Annual Report 28

June 16, 2022 Manatee County School Board 215 Manatee Avenue West Bradenton, FL 34205 Dear Members of the School Board, The Citizens’ Financial Oversight Committee (“CFOC”) has completed its review of the revenue, expenses and operating reserves of the one mill increase in the school ad valorem millage pursuant to “Resolution 2017-11” (the “Resolution”) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. Our review included accessing audited financial records of the Manatee County School District (the “District”), compiling and summarizing detailed records into the data included in this report. We performed certain analytical procedures to verify our conclusions. Also, we relied upon representations of the District, and the internal audit procedures of restricted funds of the District in reaching our conclusions. Except as otherwise set forth herein, it is our finding that tracking and accounting of Resolution Revenue and Resolution Expenditures were in material compliance with the operating budget established by the District and approved by the Board for the twelve months ending June 30, 2021. In addition to the CFOCs review of financial records of the District, the CFOC has reviewed certain data to identify relevant outcomes related to the use of the Resolution Revenue (as hereinafter defined) consistent with the stated goals of the Resolution. As illustrated within this report, the district has shown improvement in metrics related to goals set forth in the initiative. This improvement can be attributed to many factors including implementation of the referendum. That said, certain data and analysis being measured at this time are presented in this report. Note that the CFOC has experienced difficulty in acquiring homogenous datasets for comparison of data before and after the commencement of the use of the Resolution Revenue. The CFOC seeks continued cooperation with the District administration and staff in that regard. It is the CFOC’s opinion that all conclusions in this report are based on materially correct data; however, information and representations made by the District are subject to change. David Lee N. Ballard Chair, Citizens’ Financial Oversight Committee 29

pg. 2 Creation of the Citizens’ Financial Oversight Committee The Citizens’ Financial Oversight Committee (“CFOC”) was created through the Manatee County School District School Board’s approval and adoption of Resolution 2017-11 on November 14, 2017, and the subsequent vote in favor of the one mill increase in the operating ad valorem millage by the constituents of Manatee County in the Special Election held on March 20, 2018. More specifically: (a) the ballot summary question language approved in Resolution 2017-11 stated the funds generated by the one mill increase to the operating ad valorem millage would be “ .... overseen by an independent citizens’ committee”; and (b) paragraph 4 of Resolution 2017-11 provided as follows: “Provided the millage increase for Manatee County Schools is approved, a financial oversight committee appointed by the School Board shall issue an annual report to insure proper fiscal stewardship of the funds. In addition, the committee shall identify relevant outcomes and report results to the community. The School Board appointed the initial members of the committee in 2018 who serve subject to the committee charter approved by the CFOC and the School Board. Over the past two years, the Board has appointed subsequent members as terms have expired. As of June 30th, 2022, four members’ terms are expiring. Mission of the CFOC The Mission of the CFOC is to: (i) provide oversight to ensure proper fiscal stewardship of operating funds provided by the one mill increase in the operating ad valorem millage; (ii) identify and measure relevant outcomes from the deployment of the funds from the one mill increase; and (iii) report results to the School Board and the community. Operation and Organization of the CFOC In prior years, three sub-committees of the CFOC were formed. To streamline work and avoid duplicative District-staffed meetings, the Committee switched to single-member liaisons. This member attends meetings with the District’s Working Group and reports back to the full committee. Financial Review and Analysis We have completed our review of the Resolution Revenue, Expenditures and operating reserves of the Resolution Revenue. Our review included accessing audited financial records of the District, compiling and summarizing detailed records into the data included in this report. We performed certain analytical procedures to verify our conclusions. Also, we relied upon representations the District, and the internal audit procedures of restricted funds of the District in reaching our conclusions. Defining Terms • Resolution Revenue: Revenue generated from the one mill increase in the school ad valorem millage pursuant to Resolution 2017-11. • Core Revenue: All other general fund revenue • Resolution Expenditures: Expenditures restricted from the Revenue source of the one mill increase in the school ad valorem pursuant to Resolution 2017-11 • Core Expenditures: All other general fund expenditures 30

pg. 3 Conclusions Our review concludes that the financial records of the District represent, in all material respects, proper recording and tracking of the Resolution Revenue, Resolution Expenditures and operating reserves related to the Resolution Revenue as presented in the following schedules (appendices to this report): • Resolution Budget vs. Actual Expenditures/Fund Balance by Project for the Year Ended June 30th, 2021 (Schedule A) • Recap of Comparative Income and Expense Data and Analysis of Increase/Decrease for the Initial Year of Resolution Amounts (Schedule B) 31

pg. 4 Analysis Schedule A presents a comparison of budgeted Resolution Expenditures to actual Resolution Expenditures for the fiscal year ending June 30th 2021. Resolution Revenue budgeted but not spent in a given Project accounting category in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021 was carried forward to the 2020-2021 budget as adjustments restricted to the Project accounting category the funds were originally budgeted for. Similarly, Resolution Expenditures more than the budgeted amounts were carried forward to the following fiscal year as adjustments in the 2020-2021 budget. Schedule B presents comparative revenue and expense information and corresponding year over year change analysis. Total expenditures from the General Fund for the District increased by 4.66% with Core Expenditures contributing 2.74% of the increase and Resolution Expenditures contributing 29.66%. Total revenue for the District also increased 0.54% with Core Revenue and Resolution Revenue contributing -0.20% and 8.71% respectively. Discussion and Recommendations Consistent with the CFOC’s prior recommendation regarding maintaining increases in Core Expenditures consistent with economic conditions, the CFOC again recommends the School District consider Core Expenditure increases after accounting for inflation. Should there be a correlation between spending in certain areas and the success of the District, in the case of Instruction, there was likely no Core Expenditure increases net of inflation. CPI-U has increased by 10.2% between March 2021 and March 2022, per the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Incremental increases in Resolution Revenue through an increase in tax assessed values alone will not be sufficient to fund the necessary increases in certain Core Expenditure areas. The following is a breakdown of wage increases over the past 4 years with Core increases and increases that the Referendum brought to wages. In addition, the CFOC recommends that the district develops and implements a method to track retention and turnover on an employee basis. The current system tracks on the basis of a filled position, regardless of whether the same employee filled that position. 32

pg. 5 Explanation of Teacher Pay by Source Core Pay Steps 2017-'18 2018-'19 2019-'20 2020-'21 Three Year Increase Minimum entry level 1C $38,892 $39,096 $39,197 $44,941 15.55% Maximum entry level 8A $44,634 $44,839 $44,941 $44,941 0.69% Maximum 37C $65,187 $71,739 $71,840 $71,840 10.21% Referendum Supplement Steps 2017-'18 2018-'19 2019-'20 2020-'21 Annual Increase due to Referendum Minimum entry level 1C N/A $4,008 $4,728 $5,201 $5,201 Maximum entry level 8A N/A $4,008 $4,728 $5,201 $5,201 Maximum 37C N/A $4,008 $4,728 $5,201 $5,201 Additional ¼ Hour Steps 2017-'18 2018-'19 2019-'20 2020-'21 Increase due to Referendum Minimum entry level 1C N/A $1,303 $1,307 $1,498 $1,498 Maximum entry level 8A N/A $1,495 $1,498 $1,498 $1,498 Maximum 37C N/A $2,391 $2,395 $2,395 $2,395 Total Steps 2017-'18 2018-'19 2019-'20 2020-'21 Three Year Increase Minimum entry level 1C $38,892 $44,407 $45,232 $51,640 32.78% Maximum entry level 8A $44,634 $50,342 $51,167 $51,640 15.70% Maximum 37C $65,187 $78,138 $78,963 $79,436 21.86% Additional Supplements Steps 2017-'18 2018-'19 2019-'20 2020-'21 Three Year Inc

>> Good morning. Welcome to Jim 16 workshop for the Manatee County School Board. We welcome all of those who have come to there. That's at work. We have 4 items before us in the workshop setting the person school Concurrency Land Holdings in impact. The update during all the and Mike Penn, the and that will occupy about 45 minutes about We'll have an overview of the 2022. 22 23 proposed budget of the General Fund Tim Burger on and that will occupy about an hour about and the 3rd item on the agenda, citizens, Oversight Committee presentation from MISTER Bay Ballot David ballot. And that is an approximately 30 minute presentation in the last 45 minutes about workshop this morning. Well, be a discussion of the citizens and then some oversight committee by the board. Thank you for your presence at this time. We've been called to order allowed the workshop has been set. And we have here. Public public comment section. Set forth where we the instructions on the vice chair. But in the we have comment what we had about to sign up. But I know not taking any votes. Today on anything that we discussed. >> That's a check. There were 2 individuals that have signed up. Okay. I want to go ahead and give do that now. Yeah, let's get that out of the way so that we can give as much time to the >> presentation. I think the 2 people that signed up our usual and probably could recite it back to us. Even if i really need to read it because it's MISTER Hartman, MISTER Extract. >> I think they have a sheet. Yeah, I I think that MISTER Nelson and MISTER Hartman could in rounds actually repeat it back to us. I don't think I actually need to read it since it's the only there's no need to know what happened. >> I believe it would cut lot of it that if we ask the public comments to recite to cite this >> If they if they did that, then they could make a public Do I have a list of the 2 people if that's what big and then I don't I really personally, I will be that if your resting up, I don't think we need to personally. All right. They want to speak specific >> I don't know that at the end so they can speak on any of them. All right. All right. Let us begin our all day and a missed penalty. You thank you. >> Good Board chair and vice chair board members and superintendent. I'm going to give you a kind of a general context of our presentation this morning before and turn it over to Mike when it comes to school planning. There are 2 critical documents that we utilize the first document is are standing and local agreement for public school facility planning. And that is an agreement that we have between the school board, the county and the 4 municipalities within Manatee County. That let's establish 10, 2010. That is a general planning document that establishes the procedures form tracking students tracking a student generation that will talk a little bit about today. But in addition to that, most importantly, it establishes the guidelines for us to align with each one of those entities, comprehensive plans. So it's kind of the rules and how we communicate between the entities to make sure there were in line. Make sure we meet statute and make sure that we're good neighbors to one another. The second document is the Manatee County Impact Fee ordinance. And that is actually a county ordinance. It was last updated in 2017 and we're going through the process right now of updating it to make sure that we have the most student generation rates as well as the financial pieces in place that are real time and accurate for 2022. So that document also establishes the rules as to how we do the tracking, how the impact fees are collected and what the rules and requirements are associated for those impact fees. So those 2 documents kind established the baseline and Mike will get into the details now of each of those documents how it relates to school concurrency and making sure that we've got adequate students station and facilities for our students at this point, I'd like to. Yes, >> appreciate the 2 documents. Are we going to get an update based on that? Statute governing school Concurrency. >> yeah, I mean, we're going to go through and talk a little bit about the changes to the fee and and the update there were going through right now are so yes, I'll turn it over to Mike. Thank you. Good morning. Good morning. >> Like Exective planner. Appreciate opportunity be here. A little bit under the weather. So. Get through this. MISTER Finley. >> The sheriff, that why you go other so that we can all if it's it's not covid. >> think this taken to thank you, sir. I as it has you what was wrong? I ask you, what was it wrong? Okay. >> Thank you. >> So today we will be covering 3 items in this First, those school concurrency which I'll give Prime Rome. Next is our land holdings. And finally, we'll talk about impact fees. Let's start with school. Concurrency know those of you that been on the board for a while. You probably have a good understanding. School others that haven't been here so long MAY not fully understand how it operates. So school Concurrency was. Approved by the Legislature back in 2005. Before that, there are other types of concurrency. There's concurrency for. Infrastructure like water and sewer and concurrently for parks and libraries and roads. So that was a regulatory tool that legislation allowed, but not until 2005 that they recognize school as part of that infrastructure. And when they approved that required that all school districts have. A school can hurt a system in place with up to our system. In 2010, which was mandated time frame. And that's the first time that we actually have a regulatory tool in the development approval process. The entire premise of can currency is that adequate infrastructure will be in place to serve development as it occurs. So for school concurrency, it means that we will have capacity and our schools either existing or planned to serve residential development as it occurs because we only really receive student impacts residential development, other types concurrency deals with commercial and residential were sold residential. We have our own tracking system. So there's Manatee County and cities do as well. Every district has their own tracking system. Every county the state has their own so very complex system. We consider things such as cough, d. We consider existing school capacities. Consider what's in our 5 year plan in terms of capacity related projects. We look at student generation rights by types dwelling units and those student generation rates as MISTER Reality, just hold your developed through our impact. The study which are currently doing right now. We look at reserved residential approvals, footsteps and reserved approvals are. Residential developments to have gone through final site plan. We're have a final plat. They're ready to pull building permit. To build that resident ria. So we look at those and we look at income Bird residential developments. Those are developments that. They haven't quite got through that level of the process ship. They're working their way through and with them probably a year or so. They will have that reserved level. So they'll be able to pull building permits. We also look at certificates of occupancy, we track every development in the county. We can tell you how many units are left the building with development, what type units those are. So it's a very complex system. Allows us to project what what our needs are in the future. We have 4 school service areas. There are certain school service area, 1, 2, 3, 4, Like for you to make a note of how these layout, because we'll be talking about these little that in just a moment. So school service area one is in the very northwest part of the county. It goes from the the Hillsborough County line to the river. And from. The bay over 2, 3, o one parish. There's a lot of growth in that area. School service area to is primarily the eastern part of Manatee County and includes all the Lakewood Ranch development. School Service area 3 is between. I-75 and us. 41 Manatee River. The Sarasota County line. The school serves the area for. Is West Bradenton. And incorporates part Brayton Cortez Bayshore and the island communities. And as you to kind of burned into your memory. So we'll talk about those areas. More in just a moment. And our concurrency system. As I mentioned, we track growth right now. We have. We can account for 21,197. Reserve dwelling units remember reserved for the ones that the Red Hill pulled building permit. They've got their final plat. The got their final site plan. The rebuild. Once are working through the process to encumber ones we can account for additional 7800 of those. So in total we have about 29,000 dwellings that we have to the plan for right now. >> When you say planned, what's the time frame for those 29,000? >> That's a great question. That amount well, you know, it's is probably about a 6 year time frame to take them down. Keep in mind, there's a lot of other units out there that. Or what's called grandfathered that we can take those out the system every year. They were maybe approved 20 years ago. Maybe it's isolated lot here and there. So. It's not necessarily the all those units will be gone in 6 years. But that's about as secure time frame. >> I think I'd like to follow what Toad is talking about. So the the concurrency calculation. Starts Is that the application, other permitting or the beginning of construction? Because it seems like over a six-year period of All 3 of those with star and then you still get. 40 years after that before we. Take it all, we we could explain that. We began tracking concurrency as they work through the system >> from even we back up just a little bit. There are approval faces and development that can be everything from comprehensive plan amendment to rezone to general development plan to plumber site plan to final site plan. That could be one development goes to all those steps. We began tracking those that early as possible a time that they But we don't reserve concurrency until they get their final site plan or final plan approval. So it's in the late stages of development that we're we're proving that I can tell you that this 29,000 units are here, looks daunting. As just said, it's about a 6 year time frame for all those residential units to be absorbed. As just explained their various other stages of development residential development goes through. We can account for about 90,000 units around the county right now. Over the next. 10, 15, 20 years. They'll be coming forward. They've already received some love. Of approval. That might be a comprehensive plan to established that they can now begin going through the the remaining part of the permitting process. A good example. Artisan Lakes which are on talk about few minutes. That's at I-75 and between Buckeye Road and Moccasin wallow road. 353600 units approved and that development. When I worked at Manatee County and I've been here since 1998. I work at Manatee County answer community planning this traitor. That's one of my projects. That project was approved back in around 19. 95. And they're still building. So when I say 90,000 units, these take a long time because the market only absorbs what it wants to absorb. And right now. You know, this is about secure time frame. There's a lot of stuff that they're working through, but it's going to be. You know, that it's another. 2030, years of development. That's coming. >> But in any given point in When you offering up a concurrency calculation. It's probably the only as good as that day. Because it literally changes from day to day put the progress being made by the developers. It does. >> And we reconcile once a year with the county and the cities to determine what certificates have been issued. And we take those out of the system. So you're exactly right. It it's only as good as that day and builds up during the year. Then we find out what CEOs have been issue. We take those out kind of drops back down. That's an enormous task that takes months to do that. >> Literally, we have no. In With respect to the could currency calculation. It is a calculation that is given to us and that is by the market. In terms of who is building, who is building and what and what development be operating. >> Yes, sir, for the most part now we do have input as a said, it's a regulatory tool. So If you don't mind, I'll get into that a little bit more I I really want to hear the PRESIDENT, but I want to make sure that. >> We are understanding how difficult the sea is for us to play in particular that the capital planning. That we do. Long medium term and immediate. >> When the biggest thing we calculating is where to put the next crew right? And driven forces that we have no control. >> And I'll get into some of that as we get through this are thank you for your questions. All right. Thanks. As I mentioned here, and that blue boxing seaweed have approximately 29,000 units that we need to plan for at this time based on our concurrency system. We can break that down into elementary middle and high school students based on our student generation numbers that once again, they're developed through our impact fee study. And right now we need to account for about 3963 home entry students. 1630 school students and over are approximately 2100 high school students. We can take a step further and say how many schools is equal? Well, we know what our typical school sizes or of list of those here. Article student stations for an elementary school was 974 for no school at 1164 in for high schools. 1987. So that equates to about 4 entries elementary schools about 1.4 middle schools and one high school. We need to prepare for seems like an enormous tass that we haven't problems. Keep in mind. MISTER Show. That's great question. What? Yeah. What's the timeframe of these? You know, it's going to be, Tony. It's about 6 year take down. So you've got time to plan. So that's good news. The other part is that we have existing capacity in our schools. So right now I can tell you that we have about elementary schools were of capacity. We have about 2 middle schools about 0.7 high schools. That's the good news. The bad news is that capacity isn't necessarily where you need to be. You know, we have had tremendous growth in parish with tremendous growth in East Manatee County. You don't have the capacity is out of those areas. Most those capacities kind of in the western side of the county. So as we that's that's not because people moving. >> From the west to the it's because of the growth that is there. And what we now have a schools that are sitting empty. >> That's That's part of the reason. The other part what's called gentrification. So you have was that what they call Yeah, that's us. People getting older is one of the U.S. And and our kids moving out. So we have a lot of that going on in Bradenton. So mentioned with for service areas. I ask you to kind of keep in mind with the service areas are so when we adopted school concurrency back in 2010, we established level of service that level services on the bottom of the slide. So we established 110%. For elementary schools 105 for middle schools and 100% for high schools. What that means is that. The board at the time said our schools can be at 110% permanent capacity before we have a can currency issue. The reason for that is because it's there's kind of an operational breakeven number there are discussions with the board that time word. They did not want to. Have a knee j# # reaction and build a school and it be sitting there empty. Even the the Department of Education. They don't let you use state monies to build a new school until you're over capacity. And this is common throughout the state of Florida that they'll have different levels of service justice. You can see here the highlighted to these areas and wrists service area one. Remember, that's from the bay over too. Us 3 o one parish. That's your parish area. There's a lot of growth that there 120% capacity. So we've got a problem there. And then on schools where a problem and service area 3, that's the area between I-75. And us. 41 south of the river. So the wake Concurrency is established in the legislature says if you have, if you exceed capacity and any service area. You're required to look at the adjacent service area to see if there's capacity to serve them. And you have to you have to our of that shifted over so once we do that, we have. We sufficient capacity. You can see district-wide that on Elm entry. Schools were at 103%. So we're under that threshold. We're at 9% from the middle, 90 some percent for high school. The high school concerns me a little bit. Keep in mind, this does take into consideration what's on our 5 year capital plan. So it it's already counting that capacity that we have. We have to capacity projects for high schools right now. That's the expansion, Lakewood Ranch and a expansion of parish community school. Was Yes, a question when you say that you're going to borrow from the school service area, for example. >> School service, one is that 120%. But it's north of river. >> It's next to as they say to which is that 103%. So you really can't borrow much there. How do you how does? >> One borrow? For elementary schools? >> The issue with service area. One is that we don't have a lot of schools of their start with. It's not just a capacity issue. We still have the schools because it's an area that until. 7 or 8 years there really wasn't significant growth there. There's significant growth and service area too. Again, that's likely ranchers. So we have a lot of schools in that area. Where we can bar the past and all that MAY not be convenient from me. Transportation standpoint against what the legislature requires. We have to. We have to take that. Capacity from service area, too, and put it into one. >> My point is there 103% for this country. Schools? That doesn't leave much room, much capacity to move over to one. >> Right. And they go over the service area. 2 guns over yet. Look at service area through. To 4. Or to borrow. The service areas. Our only for the elementary and school. I don't mention to you that our high schools are district-wide. That's because there's so much mobility with high school students that they MAY live in South County and go to. Mic there like the branch that might get a man to them. I got to come out of. So we look at that on district-wide basis. You ask a question while ago follow what MISS This foreman is alluding to. And that is. >> First off eye of question, school service areas they did. But but I'm hearing you say is the legislature as that term. From on high. That concurrence in needs can be met. By taking. The country's currency levels in an adjacent district. And using that to meet the concurrence in needs of the district. In this case, one. But the reality is. >> There's no growth. In one because of population. The concurrence in, that there was never schools built that to begin with, to accommodate the population. And so what we're going to do is take can currency needs. From 2, which is already and one and 3% itself ship them over to one. What do you do to accommodate the growth that is considerably inconsistent. The increasing it. You know, we sell to 3, 0, one that's that would grow the growth is east. It's coming every day. So had only. Reconcile the competing. Issues. No girls. Great growth. And yet using the concurrency requirements of the area with is a great is growth. To meet the lack of concurrency needs in an area where there's no growth. >> Current see those 2 things. Number one and 2 regulatory So that would allow. I want to get back to a and it's going answer both these all right. Because you said. I'm paraphrasing, but something along the lines of. So. Was Concurrency does. Do we have any input into the currency system or do we just have to sit back and take it? That's kind of what you're getting at. So concurrence is a regulatory tool and it's a planning tool. So let's talk about the regulatory portion of it. Level services exceeded. Again. You have to borrow from the adjacent district. So if there is not over there. And you're you've exceeded that. And the service area you're in. Then you. Then growth isn't stopped. What it does is it requires that. That the school district. The county or the city, it could be a city. And a developer enter into a 3 party agreement. It's called proportionate share mitigation. That mitigation can look. Various different things. It could be a if we don't have capacity. A developer can come in and say we want to give you the school site. That's great. If you got mine built school. They can come in and say. We want to pay all of our impact fees up front to help you fund an expansion of the school or to help fund a new school. They can come in and say we want to build a school. There. There's a variety ways that proportion share mitigation look, but that's the regulatory portion of it. It again doesn't allow us to stop growth. It allows growth too. Negotiate with us so that they can continue. The. And the other part of that is planning tool. So you know that if you have a service area that is over capacity, even though you're borrowing from the existing one, it allows you time to go in and build those schools where they're needed. So hopefully that answers your helps because it's question is the tip of hat to you. >> Whether these calculations involved. Do they involve charter schools? I'm not no, sir. They did not see so. So aside from all the other problems that we have in terms trying provide public education, we aren't even able to. Negotiate what it's called shared mitigation. Well, anybody even a to deal with charter schools this problem and it makes it very difficult to plan with charter >> being something we have to contend with because we can plan a school for it can be our 5 year plan and also the charter school pops up and it might negate the need for It makes it difficult. Thank you, Thank you for the questions played it just to jump in real I think it. >> When this foreman was talking about, you know, trying to reduce that 120% and ssa one. You MAY have to make some changes as far as taking students from one. Do you know school somewhere else? But that's not a. I would hope that that's not a permanent solution. From our standpoint. That's enough to give us time to build the schools, to make sure we're. And get currency. So that's correct. Is that how would mean so my question would be in this MAY not be for you. You know, if if if we do that with the kindergartner now the said they hit 3rd grade and now they're area. We've got to school. Do we did switch into that school? And given the chance to go keep going to school they're at. And that MAY not be a question for you. That MAY be for MISTER Shower, actually. Yeah, I think I can answer this because. >> Let me explain a little bit more and current season series. So we're at 120% and school service area want. Goes in that calculation. Is your permanent capacity? Utilize portable saw throughout the district. So we MAY have schools to have portables and those kids that live there can still go school until we can provide new facilities. So we're not necessarily transporting them out of the service areas that are. Let's move vacant land ownership. Reason this is on here is because question for yes, follow-up. Who determines? The school's savers. The school board. And that's part of the Inter local agreement that the board entered into with Manatee County and the cities. Often. >> We allowed. To reestablish. School concurrency school here. >> There's no limit on that. That never been reestablished. I. Once most school districts adopt one, they stick with it. But there's nothing prohibiting from changing it. It is a monumental task and it's not something you