>> FILED BY MR. ANGELO LAMONTE AND WE WILL NOW BEGIN THE HEARING.
[00:00:04]
MY NAME IS RENE ARCHAMBAULT.I'M PRESIDENT OF THE FRISCO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES.
FOR THE RECORD, TODAY IS AUGUST 25TH, 2021, AND THE TIME IS 1:00 PM.
THE BOARD IS HEARING A LEVEL 3 APPEAL BROUGHT
[3. Level III Appeal of Angelo Lomonte]
FORWARD BY MR. ANGELO LAMONTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD POLICIES, GF (LEGAL) AND GF (LOCAL).THIS PROCEEDING WILL BE RECORDED TO ENSURE THAT AN ACCURATE RECORD IS KEPT.
THE PORTION OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN WHICH THE COMPLAINANT PRESENTS HIS STATEMENTS WILL BE RECORDED.
THE BOARDS CONSULTATION WITH ITS ATTORNEY WILL NOT BE RECORDED.
FOR THE RECORD, I ASK THAT EACH PERSON PARTICIPATING IN THE HEARING, PLEASE STATE THEIR NAME AND THE REASON FOR ATTENDING.
WE WILL BEGIN WITH BOARD MEMBERS.
>> JOHN CLASSE, BOARD VICE PRESIDENT.
>> RENE ARCHAMBAULT, BOARD PRESIDENT.
>> CHAD RUDY, BOARD SECRETARY.
>> AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO INSTRUCT ALL PARTICIPANTS TO PLEASE AVOID TALKING WHEN OTHER PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING SO THAT THE RECORDING WILL ACCURATELY REFLECT THE PROCEEDINGS.
FURTHER, PLEASE ENDEAVOR TO MAKE YOUR ORAL STATEMENTS AS CLEAR AND COMPLETE AS POSSIBLE.
REMEMBER THAT THE RECORDING WILL NOT REFLECT GESTURES OR ANY OTHER FORM OF NON-VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS.
THIS HEARING WILL BE CONDUCTED AS AN ADMINISTRATOR PRESENTATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE POLICIES AND LAW, IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD POLICY, GF (LOCAL), THE HEARING WILL BE LIMITED TO THE ISSUES AND DOCUMENTS INCLUDED IN THE WRITTEN COMPLAINANT.
THIS IS NOT A FORMAL LEGAL PROCEEDING AND NO STRICT RULES OF EVIDENCE OR PROCEDURAL APPLY.
THIS HEARING IS AN APPEAL TO THE BOARD REGARDING A DECISION MADE BY THE BOARD UNDER BOARD POLICY GF (LOCAL).
THE COMPLAINANT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE HIS PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD.
THE COMPLAINANT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO QUESTION THE BOARD.
HOWEVER, THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE COMPLAINANT OR HIS COUNSEL, IF ANY.
THE COMPLAINANT WILL BE ALLOCATED 10 MINUTES TO MAKE HIS PRESENTATION.
DOES THE COMPLAINANT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE PROCEDURES?
>> NOW THAT WE HAVE REVIEWED THE PROCEDURES FOR THE HEARING, IT'S TIME TO DETERMINE THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE BOARD MEMBERS TO HEAR AND CONSIDER THIS MATTER.
IF ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD FEELS THAT HE OR SHE CANNOT HEAR OR CONSIDER THIS MATTER OF THE BOARD MEMBERS SHOULD SO STATE AT THIS TIME AND NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE HEARING.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT EACH MEMBER OF THE BOARD PRESENT HAS INDICATED THAT HE OR SHE CAN CONSIDER THE INFORMATION PRESENTED AT THIS HEARING AND MAKE A DECISION IN A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL MANNER.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, I'M GOING TO ASK THAT YOU HOLD YOUR QUESTIONS, IF ANY, UNTIL THE CONCLUSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY THE COMPLAINANT.
MR. LAMONTE, WHO WILL BE MAKING THE PRESENTATION ON YOUR BEHALF?
>> MR. LAMONTE, YOU WILL HAVE 10 MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION AND WE'RE GOING TO USE THE TIMER AT THE PODIUM.
WHEN YOU SEE THE YELLOW, THAT SHOULD INDICATE ONE MINUTE REMAINING. IS THAT CORRECT? MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS PRIOR TO HANDING THIS OVER TO MR. LAMONTE? ANY QUESTIONS? NO. MR. LAMONTE YOU MAY BEGIN.
>> ACTUALLY BEFORE WE GET STARTED, CAN WE JUST CLARIFY, SO AM I SUPPOSE TO JUST READ THE ENTIRE COMPLAINT OR IS EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD ALREADY READ IT AND UNDERSTANDS ALL THE QUESTIONS IN THE COMPLAINT?
>> WE RECEIVED YOUR COMPLAINT, EVERYTHING THAT YOU SUBMITTED SO IT'S JUST A PRESENTATION OF YOUR COMPLAINT.
YOU MAY READ THAT IF YOU'D LIKE OR IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SHARE IT'S COMPLETELY UP TO YOU.
>> THEN I GUESS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ALL ON THE RECORD, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND READ IT.
BUT I GUESS BEFORE I GET STARTED, I THINK FOR ME, I'M A 20-YEAR PUBLIC SERVANT, SPENT TIME ON MANY PUBLIC ADVOCACY CAMPAIGNS.
BEING A PUBLIC ADVOCATE, I'VE ALSO SAT ON BOARD SIMILAR TO THIS.
I WAS A TRUSTEE AND A COMMITTEE MEN ON THE LONG BEACH ZONING BOARD IN NEW YORK, AND SO I SPENT MANY YEARS, SIX PLUS YEARS SITTING IN YOUR SEAT, DEALING WITH VERY DIFFICULT AND TOUGH DECISIONS, HAVING PEOPLE COME UP TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THINGS THAT THEY DIDN'T LIKE THAT WAS HAPPENING AND IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES, I HAVE A MINUTE LEFT.
>> YOU CAN JUST KEEP GOING. YOU HAVE EIGHT MINUTES AND I'LL ALERT YOU WHEN YOU HAVE A MINUTE LEFT. GO AHEAD.
>> GOING BACK TO THIS AND SO AGAIN, FOR MY TIME SITTING ON A BOARD, I AM WELL AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THE BOARD DOES HAVE A RIGHT TO RESTRICT COMMENTS AND TIMING AND ALL THE REST OF THIS STUFF AS IT IS RELEVANT AND GERMANE TO YOUR BUSINESS.
BUT MY ISSUE IS THAT THE ANTICIPATED LIMITS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE REASONABLE.
[00:05:01]
THE LIMITS YOU'VE PLACED HERE IN MY BELIEF AND IN THE BELIEF OF MANY IN THE PUBLIC ARE UNREASONABLE.I BELIEVE IT WAS ACTUALLY YOU MISS ARCHAMBAULT, WHO AT THE LAST MEETING SAID TO SOMEBODY, "WE KNOW A MINUTE IS FAST, BUT WE DO WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY." WELL, IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN WHY DID THIS CHANGE HAPPEN TO THE POINT WHERE WE'RE GETTING DOWN ON REDUCING PEOPLE TO A MINUTE TO MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION.
THEREFORE, AS WE LOOK AT THE SPECIFIC CHANGES ON JUNE 2011 TO THE BOARD'S OPERATING PROCEDURES, MY BELIEF IS YOU'VE PLACED LIMITATIONS ON OUR ABILITY TO REDRESS YOU DURING PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA AND NON-AGENDA ITEMS, TO HAVE ALL VOICES HEARD REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF CITIZENS.
THIS ALSO PLAYS A LIMITATION ON OUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH.
ALSO TO INFORM THE BOARD IN A PUBLIC SETTING ON MATTERS THAT ARE CONCERNING TO THE ELECTORATE ON AGENDA AND NON-AGENDA ITEMS, AS NO OTHER PUBLIC FORUM EXISTS.
BECAUSE THAT IS THE OTHER CLARIFYING POINT HERE, WE DO NOT HAVE ANOTHER VEHICLE BY WHICH TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THIS ENTIRE BOARD IN A TWO-WAY DIALOGUE.
BECAUSE WHAT FRUSTRATES ME IS THAT WHEN I SET ON IN YOUR SHOES, I CONVERSED WITH THE PEOPLE ON THIS SIDE OF THE PODIUM.
WHEN THEY HAD QUESTIONS, I DIDN'T JUST STAY UP THERE AS MUTES AND NOT REALLY ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS.
IT WAS A DIALOGUE. I FELT LIKE WE WERE PART OF THE CONVERSATION.
WHEREAS HERE, MANY OF US WHO COME AND PRESENT HERE, DO NOT FEEL LIKE WE HAVE THAT DIALOGUE BECAUSE THERE WAS NO CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE BOARD, AND JUST AS YOU LAID OUT AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS SESSION, THAT YOU WILL NOT RESPOND TO MY COMMENTS.
I'M NOT ALLOWED TO QUESTION YOU.
SEE HOW THAT PUTS A WALL BETWEEN US EVEN THOUGH WE ARE JUST FEET FROM EACH OTHER.
NEXT I'M GOING TO EXPLAIN HOW I'VE BEEN HARMED BY THIS DECISION OR CIRCUMSTANCE.
FIRST OF ALL, WE'VE HAVE UNREASONABLE RULES AND LIMITS PLACED ON YOUR ABILITY TO SPEAK.
UNREASONABLE RULES AND LIMITS PLACED ON THE NUMBER OF CITIZENS WHO ARE ALLOWED TO SPEAK.
AS THIS CREATES A CHILLING EFFECT, LEAVING CITIZENS DISSUADED FROM APPROACHING THE BOARD, AND SPECIFICALLY THOSE WHO WISH TO CRITICIZE THE BOARD, WHICH IS ACTUALLY IN MY OPINION, A VIOLATION OF SECTION 551-.007.E OF THE TEXAS CODE OF OPEN MEETINGS LAW.
YOUR NEW RULES, IN MY OPINION, HAVE BEEN CREATED DUE TO RECENT PUBLIC IRE WITH THE BOARD STANCE ON VARIOUS POSITIONS ON SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES AND ARE WAY TO AVOID CRITICISM.
THEREFORE, I WOULD LIKE MY REMEDY OR WHAT I'M SEEKING FROM THIS COMPLAINT IS FOR YOU TO EXTEND THE SPEAKING TIME ALLOWED FOR EACH CITIZEN BACK TO FIVE MINUTES, NO LIMITATION ON THE NUMBER OF CITIZENS ALLOWED TO SPEAK ON THE AGENDA OR NON-AGENDA RELATED ITEMS, AND OVERALL, NO OVERALL LIMITATION ON PUBLIC COMMENTARY ON AGENDA ITEMS AND NON-AGENDA ITEMS. ANY AND ALL CITIZEN COMMENTARY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AS THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME FOR IT TO BE PUT IN ANY HEARING, THEREBY ALLOWING CITIZENS THE TIME TO REACT AND DISCUSS THE BOARD'S SPECIFIC DISCUSSIONS ON THE MATTER AT HAND.
THE TIMER TO BE STOPPED SHOULD ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE SUPERINTENDENT LEAVING THE DAIS AND THEN RESUME UPON THEIR RETURN TO THE DAIS, AND THEN CITE IN DETAIL THE METHODOLOGY AND PRECEDENT BY WHICH THESE NEW OPERATING PROCEDURES WERE DEVELOPED BECAUSE THERE WASN'T A LOT OF CLARITY WITH REGARD TO THAT WHEN THESE WERE IMPLEMENTED BACK IN JUNE.
BECAUSE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THAT IS AGAIN CRITICAL THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS HERE WITH THE PUBLIC HAS TO SAY ON ALL OF THESE ITEMS SO YOU ARE WELL-INFORMED AS TO HOW TO REPRESENT US.
AGAIN, AS NO OTHER VEHICLE FOR COMMUNICATION WITH THIS BOARD EXISTS IN A PUBLIC FASHION. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? ONE OF THE REMEDIES THAT YOU ASKED FOR IS FOR FIVE MINUTES WITH UNLIMITED NUMBER OF SPEAKERS.
AT WHAT POINT AND HOW LONG DO YOU THINK THAT THAT IS EXCESSIVE?
>> MY PREVIOUS ZONING BOARD EXPERIENCE, I'D BE THERE TILL 12, ONE, TWO O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING.
THAT'S IF WE ONLY HAD FOUR OR FIVE CASES BECAUSE WE HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAD A LOT OF PASSIONATE THINGS TO SAY.
BEFORE I RENDERED MY DECISION AND MY VOTE BECAUSE THEY ENTRUSTED ME BY PUTTING THE UP THERE, I WANTED TO HEAR WHAT EVERYONE HAD TO SAY.
>> BOARD MEMBERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS, THIS CONCLUDES THE PRECEDING.
THE BOARD WILL NOW ADJOURN INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO
[4. Closed Session under Texas Government Code Chapter 551, Subchapters D and E]
TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 551.071 AND 551.0821.THE BOARD WILL THEN RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION AND TAKE ACTION IF APPROPRIATE.
[00:10:02]
THEREFORE, IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION AT THIS TIME, I WOULD ASK EVERYONE ADJOURN EXCEPT MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, THE SUPERINTENDENT, AND THE BOARD'S ATTORNEYS.THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE, AND WE WILL GO INTO CLOSED SESSION.
THE BOARD CONDUCTED THE LEVEL 3 APPEAL HEARING FILE BY MR. ANGELO LAMONTE.
THE BOARD THEN MET AN EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.071 AND 551.074, AND 551.0821 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.
FOLLOWING EXECUTIVE SESSION, THE BOARD NOW HAS RECONVENED INTO OPEN SESSION.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 551 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, ANY ACTION TAKEN REGARDING THIS MATTER AND MUST BE TAKEN IN OPEN SESSION.
DO I HAVE A MOTION ON THE LEVEL 3 APPEAL FILED BY MR. LAMONTE?
[6.B. Consideration and possible action on the Level III appeal of Angelo Lomonte.]
>> I JUST HAD A COUPLE CLARIFYING POINTS BEFORE WE GET TO A MOTION.
MR. LAMONTE, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING YOUR COMPLAINT TO THE BOARD.
I JUST WANTED TO TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU SAID DURING YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT HERE.
YOU MENTIONED THAT IT WAS TOO SHORT AT ONE MINUTE.
BUT WHAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THAT THE MAXIMUM TIME ALLOTTED BY THE CURRENT POLICY IS TWO MINUTES, AND THAT IS GOING TO BE DETERMINED BY OUR NEW POLICY IN WRITING BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT SIGN UP.
IT'S NOT ARBITRARY, IT'S ACTUALLY OUT THERE FOR EVERYONE TO SEE THAT WE GET BEYOND A CERTAIN POINT, IT WOULD BE REDUCED TO ONE MINUTE, BUT BELOW THAT NUMBER OF SPEAKERS, IT WILL REMAIN TWO.
I'LL POINT OUT ALSO THAT THE TEXAS SENATE RESTRICTS PUBLIC COMMENTS TO TWO MINUTES WHEN PEOPLE COME DOWN TO AUSTIN TO TESTIFY.
IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE TEXAS SENATE.
I THINK IT WORKS FOR FRISCO ISD AS WELL.
YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE'S NO TWO-WAY DIALOGUE.
I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT BY LAW, THE BOARD IS NOT ALLOWED TO ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE DURING A BOARD MEETING WITH PUBLIC COMMENTERS WHO ARE SPEAKING ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. IF THEY ARE SPEAKING ON AN AGENDA ITEM BECAUSE THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN DULY NOTIFIED THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED THAT NIGHT, WE CAN ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE.
BUT WHEN IT'S A NON-AGENDA ITEM BY LAW, WE CANNOT.
MANY OF THE CHANGES THAT YOU'RE POINTING OUT WERE ALREADY IN OUR POLICY.
WE DECIDED AS A BOARD THAT WE WERE NOT APPLYING THEM EQUALLY TO ALL SPEAKERS AT ALL TIMES AND THEREFORE WANTED TO FLESH THOSE OUT MORE SO, SO THAT PEOPLE CAN HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THEY COULD EXPERIENCE OR WHAT THEIR EXPERIENCE WOULD BE WHEN THEY CAME TO SPEAK BEFORE THE BOARD.
SOME OTHER METHODS OF COMMUNICATING WITH THE BOARD.
OUR AGENDAS ARE POSTED 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE BY LAW SO THAT THE PUBLIC CAN SEE WHAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO DISCUSS THAT EVENING, GIVING THEM AMPLE TIME TO EMAIL US, TO CALL US, OR TO COME SPEAK BEFORE THE BOARD IF THEY WANT TO.
WHILE YOU'VE SAID THAT ONE MINUTE IS NOT ADEQUATE, I KNOW YOU'VE SPOKEN TO THE BOARD AT LEAST TWICE AT PAST BOARD MEETINGS.
ONE TIME IT WAS ON COVID POLICIES, MANY OF WHICH HAVE BEEN CHANGED.
ANOTHER TIME IT WAS ON RACE IN EDUCATION, WHICH HAS LED TO CHANGES ON PUBLICATIONS ON OUR WEBSITE.
I DON'T THINK THAT I FOLLOW ALONG WITH THE ARGUMENT THAT A ONE-MINUTE SPEECH BEFORE THE BOARD IS INADEQUATE.
WE ALSO HAVE INSIDE SCOOP OR COFFEE TALKS WHERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN COME AND INTERACT WITH MEMBERS OF THE ISD, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, IN AN INFORMAL SETTING.
WE DO THOSE AT LEAST FOUR TIMES A YEAR AT DIFFERENT PLACES AROUND THE DISTRICT.
A COUPLE OF THEM ARE IN THE MORNING, COUPLE OF THEM ARE IN THE EVENING.
THERE ARE A LOT LESS FORMAL SETTING THAN A BOARD MEETING IN ORDER TO ENGAGE WITH THE BOARD AND MEMBERS OF TOP-LEVEL ADMINISTRATION.
I POINT ALL OF THOSE THINGS OUT BECAUSE I WANT THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE CHANGES WERE PUT IN PLACE AND IN OTHER WAYS THAT THEY CAN COMMUNICATE WITH THE BOARD ASIDE FROM PUBLIC COMMENT AT A BOARD MEETING.
I'LL HOLD MY MOTION THOUGH UNTIL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD WHO MIGHT ALSO HAVE OTHER COMMENTS GET TO EXPRESS THOSE.
>> THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD ADD IS THE TIME WE DO NOT LIMIT SPEAKERS.
THAT WOULD BE THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD JUST ADD.
>> DEBBIE'S POINT IS IF YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM, THERE IS NO LIMIT TO THE NUMBER OF SPEAKERS.
THE 30-MINUTE RESTRICTION WOULD JUST BE TO SPEAKERS THAT COME TO SPEAK ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS, THINGS THAT WE CAN'T TAKE ACTION ON ANYWAY.
WE WILL ALWAYS HEAR THOSE THAT COME TO SPEAK PUBLICLY BEFORE THE BOARD AND WE'LL HEAR THOSE COMMENTS BEFORE WE TAKE ACTION ON AN AGENDA ITEM IN ANY GIVEN EVENING.
THAT'S BEEN POLICY, THAT IS LAW, AND THAT CONTINUES TO BE POLICY.
>> WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYONE SIGN IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
WE CAN MOVE DIRECTLY TO ITEM 6B, WHICH IS CONSIDER AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE LEVEL 3 APPEAL.
>> ALL RIGHT. THEN I'LL MOVE TO DENY THE LEVEL 3 COMPLAINT.
>> MOTION BY MR. CLASEY SECOND BY MS. ABEAR. ALL IN FAVOR?
[00:15:03]
WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM 6A,[6.A. Act on personnel recommendations]
ACT ON PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS.BOARD, YOU HAVE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS IN BOARD BOOK.
IF YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I WILL LOOK FOR A MOTION.
>> I RECOMMEND A MOTION TO APPROVE PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS AS PRESENTED.
>> MOTION BY MS. DAVIS, SECOND BY MS. GILLESPIE. ALL IN FAVOR?
>> AYE. MOTION PASSES SIX, ZERO.
WE WILL MOVE TO OUR FINAL ACTION ITEM, ITEM 6C,
[6.C. Consider and act on budget transfers and amendments for the 2020-2021 General Fund budget]
CONSIDER AN ACT ON BUDGET TRANSFERS AND AMENDMENTS FOR THE 2020/2021 GENERAL FUND. MRS. SMITH.>> THANK YOU. I GAVE YOU GUYS A HEADS UP ABOUT THIS IN HOME BASE.
THIS IS FOR LAST YEAR'S BUDGET 2020/2021.
IT'S JUST SOME CLEANUP OF ACCOUNT CODING THAT WE IDENTIFIED AS WE WERE PREPARING FOR THIS YEAR'S AUDIT.
THIS IS NOT REALLY A BUDGET AMENDMENT, IT'S JUST SOME TRANSFERRING OF BUDGET BETWEEN FUNCTIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS PRIOR TO THE AUDIT WITHOUT GOING OVER BUDGET IN A PARTICULAR FUNCTION.
I'D BE HAPPY TO GO INTO ANY DETAIL IF YOU GUYS HAVE QUESTIONS, BUT LIKE I SAID, IT'S JUST AN ACCOUNT CODE CLEANUP FOR LAST YEAR'S BUDGET.
>> THANK YOU. BOARD, ANY QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I WILL LOOK FOR A MOTION.
>> MOVE TO APPROVE THE BUDGET TRANSFERS AMENDMENTS FOR THE 2020/2021 GENERAL FUND BUDGET.
>> MOTION BY MR. REEDIE, SECOND BY MR. CLASEY. ALL IN FAVOR?
FOR THAT IS OUR LAST ACTION ITEM, WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.