By Andy Dance
I appreciate this opportunity to add clarity to the current discussion surrounding funding for Flagler County School Resource Deputies. The following is my rebuttal to the Flaglerlive editorial dated Feb. 22, and the original Feb. 19 article.
I want to make one thing clear to the children, parents, school staff and residents of Flagler County: safe schools are critically important to a thriving and growing Flagler County community. The current SRD program in Flagler County schools is working and the officers are treasured by children, parents, and school staff members. Why would the County jeopardize safe schools, when so many of the County’s employees are parents with children in school? The County relies on the presence of SRD’s and the commitment to safe schools as a recruiting tool for hiring working parents and attracting targeted industries to relocate to Flagler County.
Personally, I worked too hard as your former school board member to help establish the SRD program in our schools and I won’t stand for anything that would undermine this critical program. This is personal to me for many reasons, especially since my children were attending school during both the Sandy Hook and Parkland school shootings. At the time of the Sandy Hook school shooting in 2012, my children were 10, 12 and 14 years old (one in elementary, one in middle and one in high school). During the Parkland High School shooting in 2018, I had two high school students left in school. These shootings are etched forever in my conscience.
The internal memo from County Administrator Heidi Petito to Superintendent of Flagler Schools generated a firestorm when it was reported by Flaglerlive last week. The problem isn’t the letter. The problem that I have is with the author’s commentary that accompanied it. It was unnecessarily explosive, and conclusions were taken out of context. I talked extensively with Flaglerlive editor Pierre Tristam Wednesday evening and clarified the context and intent behind the letter. This was not a press release, it was a memo from one executive to the other and it followed repeated attempts by the County to have this conversation with School District administration, going back to the Cathy Mittlestadt administration.
I refer you to an email one year ago on January 14th, 2023, that includes a discussion from Petito to then-Superintendent Cathy Mittlestadt, “to come up with an implementation plan and start discussions to unwind those legacy expenditures, as it will likely be a phased approach…” Additionally, there was discussion on this topic during a budget workshop last year on January 17, 2023. Minutes from that meeting (page 5) included this statement: “County Administrator Petito continued the presentation on the options to reduce legacy expenditures, stating this was a delicate subject that would require a great deal of time to unwind, but the County needed to start the conversation and come up with a phased-out approach.”
Upon further review, the Petito letter at the center of this discussion has been taken out of context with previous written and verbal communications. The article concludes that “the timeline was implied: we need to get this done,” but this is inconsistent with the earlier messaging from the Administrator. The January 17, 2023, workshop minutes clearly detail the sensitivity of the discussion and extensive length of time the unwinding would take. In the minutes, Petito states “this was a delicate subject that would require a great deal of time to unwind.”
Likewise, the assumption that “there was nothing about this being just a discussion item, a conversation opener” is also contradicted by the Mittlestadt-Petito email where Ms. Petito stated she wanted to “start a discussion to unwind those legacy expenditures.”
Context is everything.
Additionally, the administrator had one-on-one meetings with commissioners following my recommendation at the December 5, 2022 workshop. This was yet another workshop where the Commissioners talked about unwinding legacy expenditures. I used my time during the one-on-one meeting with Petito to share my knowledge of School District finances and the constraints the district is under and offered that if we are to discuss unwinding the legacy expenses, we must also be prepared to present options and solutions. I cautioned that any solution would take time to implement and would not offer immediate relief. On January 14th, 2023, Petito informed Mittelstadt about the Commission’s intent to “start discussions” with Mittelstadt.
The article hints that “constituents may have taken the proposal more seriously had it not been pitched in the context of a County Commission obsessed with lowering its tax rate.” Why would a Commission focus on incrementally lowering millage (tax rate) in the face of many needs? First, lowering millage during a period of property value increases helps create a buffer between the current millage and the maximum millage (10 mills) that the county can levy. It is a buffer against recession when millage has to increase during property values decreases. Second, rental housing does not benefit from homestead exemptions, therefore millage reductions are beneficial to the rental home market. Property tax increases are passed along to the renter, increasing rental rates to residents.
Pierre does correctly point out two important details in this discussion about funding SRD’s. First, quoting the editorial, Pierre explains, “In 2020-21, the last complete year for which figures were readily available… the district actually made a profit on its Safe Schools allocation. The state appropriated $882,186 to Flagler. The district’s contract with the sheriff appropriated $748,162, leaving a net profit to the district of $134,024.” Pierre further concludes, “Even when you include the $103,000 the district spent on crossing guards, it still came out ahead. In other words, the district’s general fund budget was entirely spared by any money spent on deputies. You can’t say the same about the county, whose every dollar contributed to school deputies comes out of the general fund.”
The current amount coming from the County’s general fund is nearly one million dollars. The City of Palm Coast pays for one deputy ($142,000) and the Imagine School at Town Center pays for their own deputy ($142,000).
Second, Pierre restated portions of our discussion, particularly that the County “has been attempting to have this conversation with the district since before [Superintendent LaShakia] Moore took over.” The County even reached out this past year and invited the school district to be a part of the Flagler County legislative platform publication. This annual report includes all the municipalities in the County and presents our legislative priorities to our state representatives in one, concise program. In this publication, we present all priorities as a unified community. The County reached out to the District, to join us as part of the unified legislative request and offering that it was a good time to address the discrepancy in the Safe School funding formula that penalizes Flagler County for being a “safe” county with a low crime rate. Unfortunately, the District did not respond.
Suggesting any modification to this funding split, after so many years, is challenging and uncomfortable. This SRD funding discussion is about transparency with the tax-payers and aligning the ultimate responsibility for school safety where it is statutorily anchored, with the local school district. Unfortunately, a potentially positive discussion about the budgetary constraints facing local governments, detailing how SRD’s are funded and the potential for innovative funding models, created by collaborative problem-solving was lost in the “defund” rhetoric.
Prior to this article, I don’t believe that many tax-payers knew that $1 million of the County’s general revenue budget was allocated to SRD’s. I talked to parents following this article’s release, and it is apparent that parents aren’t concerned with where the money comes from as long as it is taken care of. I don’t blame parents for thinking this, but this proves to me that this discussion about how we fund SRD’s is important and needed.
My position in this discussion is unique, as I sat as a school board member for twelve years, and currently sit as the County Commission chair. From the School Board side, the Commission contribution was necessary and appreciated in the face of the failed half-mil property tax referendum in 2013. Not only did the School Board lose the referendum, the District lost the continuation of the quarter-mil funding that had been in place for many years. It has been 12 years since that referendum was denied by the public. Pierre rightly raised an interesting funding option: “Maybe if the district tried again in this post-Parkland era it would get a different result.”
My desire as a County Commissioner is to see the District and County collaboratively analyze these SRD funding allocations and work toward a more equitable and sustainable plan to fund SRD’s that aligns with each entity’s essential, statutory obligations. Flagler’s SRD funding formula is not the norm when you analyze SRD funding across the state. The County administrator and her staff have spent countless hours compiling data and talking to other government leaders to find options to this formula that maintains our current level of SRD funding while aligning statutory responsibilities.
County Government has its own set of statutory obligations, and properly funding those obligations, such as the Flagler County Sheriff’s Office (jail, bailiff, law enforcement), Flagler County Fire Rescue & county-wide ambulance service, Emergency Management, and the constitutional offices (Tax Collector, Supervisor of Elections, Property Appraiser, Clerk of Courts) is County government’s essential obligation. There are plenty of additional services we provide, but they are too numerous to mention. (The current budget outlines all those funded services.) Collectively, if we can find a solution for the school district that fully funds the SRD program, thus aligning funding with each respective government’s essential, statutory obligations, then each government can exclusively focus on their priorities.
I want to reemphasize: I will not take action that jeopardizes school safety or SRD’s in the school. All the County is asking for is to start a discussion with the school district on the current funding arrangement. Is the current distribution fair? Has the District exhausted all opportunities to solely fund the current SRD program? Has the school district engaged with legislators to modify the funding formula for the “Safe Schools” allocation? Have they exhausted grant opportunities?
In the end, should the Schools District demonstrate they have exhausted every opportunity for funding SRD’s and still need financial assistance to maintain the current level of service, then we are back to square one. In that event, I support an equitable “shared community effort” as Moore pointedly stated at the recent school board meeting. However, I don’t believe we will return to square one. I believe we can equitably and sustainably fund SRD’s that the entire community can rally around. It will take our entire Flagler community to make it happen to move Flagler forward.
In conclusion, contrary to what has been implied and shared online, there is no immediate threat to alter the current funding commitment for safe schools and SRD’s. However, there will be meetings occurring soon to initiate a collaborative approach to evaluate funding constraints and opportunities that face the District and the County to address the County’s concerns. There is no predetermined timeline for action on these discussions. School Resource Deputies are not leaving school campuses.
Thank you for reading this far and I thank Pierre for allowing me this opportunity to respond.
Andy Dance is the Flagler County Commission Chair. He was elected to the Commission in 2020. He served as a Flagler County School Board member between 2008 and 2020. Reach him by email here.
Deborah Coffey says
Commissioner Dance, do you remember when Mexico was going to pay for the wall? Yeah…I do.
Duane says
Either the Commissioners are lying or Petito has really has a problem with her communication skills both receiving a giving.
Robin says
What a wonderful example of civil civic discourse. Thank you Pierre and Andy for raising the issue, discussing the options, and outline the process going forward to a resolution.
It is refreshing.
BLINDSPOTTING says
Andy Dance responded quickly to the Flagler Live article: Beyond the county’s clumsy
push to defund School deputies thanks to Pierre’s relentless work of presenting information
to the public sector. It’s ashame that Dance does not answer his public emails as quickly
perhaps of course this is an election year for Dance and Dance is going to do whatever it takes
to get reelected or perhaps due to his big ego he could not take the public scrutiny on this topic.
However this is not the one and only example of Dance’s ineffectiveness in holding a county
seat. He voted on the Bing’s Landing project, did nothing to help resolve the Old Dixie Hotel
dump that continues to cost taxpayers money for evening police patrols and is a continuous
eyesore to the taxpayers who live in that community, does ribbon cutting for the new shiny
additional hangers at the county airport for as Sieger puts it, for the “average Joe”. What
“average Joe”can afford to buy a plane and pay rent for a hanger is beyond gaslighting as
this airport receives FAA funding as part of the agreement to welcome in flight schools from the
tricounty area to perform dangerously low touch and goes over residents homes, pollute
our environment and water system with leaded fuel as they fly over a hospital and highschool.
The building of the Cascades will also be impacted with the same noise and pollutants, plus
now land is being surveyed on 1 Zonal Court for future development another direct
hit for flight school planes thus further destruction of sensitive wetlands, fauna and flora.
It’s the FAA funding as well as FDOT that allows Sieger to have his rich friends playground
to house their “average Joe” planes all at the expense of people’s safety and health and Dance
plays a key role in allowing this to continue. Dance needs to go back to the school board
where he is desperately needed as now we understand that a lawyer from Chiumentos firm
is running against Massaro for election as they are trying to pack this school board with
their cronies in effort to accompany Chong, Furry and or Hunt depending on whether she
makes up her mind to stay or leave. Fact still remains that Dance’s spouse is assistant to
Petito , our county administrator, which is a DIRECT CONFLICT OF INTEREST and
Petito has the power to fire her, this we do not want to see as Lucy was there way before
her spouse and does a great job in her position, maybe Andy should have carefully
thought about this before running for a county seat. We also want to add that there is
no minority representation on this county board which is lacking. Dance was effective
on our school board but as a county commissioner new roles are taken on and we need
representatives who stand on their own and are a voice for their constituents and do not
become part of the problems with which our county faces.
Pierre Tristam says
As Robin notes, I too am very grateful for the seriousness and the tenor of the discussion: if all debates were handled the way Andy Dance handles them, we’d have quite a community. I don’t plan on re-litigating the issue in Andy’s and my pieces, as we’ve each made our points.
But there’s one point outside the scope of the SRD issue that Andy made that I think bears addressing, especially as it relates to one of his cherished view of government: process. He refers to the memo from Petito to Moore as an “internal” memo, and refers to other such “internal” communications that we in the public had not been privy to, or would not have been privy to, had either reporting or these recent disclosures not made them public. The suggestion is that none of this “firestorm” would have happened had the letter not been disclosed.
When an elected or government official refers to documents as “internal,” it raises a red flag to me, on a couple of counts: it suggests that a) communications are taking place that the public doesn’t need to know about until the officials are ready to disclose what they wish, and b) it suggests that there is such a thing as “internal” as opposed to public communications. I think both suggestions are to some degree improper and run counter both to the letter and the spirit of our Sunshine law, but also to the very idea of process than Andy justly talks about.
There’s no question that in the strict sense of the term, internal communications and discussions take place in government all that time–that most discussions are not in the public eye. That’s fine. That’s the nature of government. It couldn’t function otherwise. But that doesn’t mean that those communications, having to do with public business (by definition, they cannot have to do with anything else, not legally anyway) are of pubic concern, therefore cannot be said in any way to be improperly disclosed, or disclosed at the wrong time. The fact that an issue isn’t disclosed through a government press release doesn’t mean that the public doesn’t have a right to it. Government “news” releases are not news. They are what back-patting the government wants us to know, but they are definitely not serious disclosures of serious ongoing issues. It’s media’s job to keep up with those issues. But when we do that job, it’s not government’s place to complain that an “internal” document has been improperly disclosed, as that brings me to b) There is no such thing as an “internal” government document under Florida’s sunshine law. All documents (with those exceptions outlined in law of course, and that list is unfortunately growing, but has nothing to do with what we’re talking about here) all documents are public. That’s in law. There is no time stamp, no political timing, no opportune administrative timeline, that makes a document public or not public (again, with those exceptions).
The “internal” communications concept is worrisome, in that it is more reflective of what, say, our unfortunate school board has become (a routine violator of sunshine and as contemptuous a government body toward the public and public disclosures as there is) than it is of that process Andy champions. Put another way: in an ideal world, that letter Petito sent the superintendent should have been on a portal, accessible to us all, like all other “internal” documents, at least those that our elected officials receive, are very well aware of, and discuss “internally,” in these one on one meetings, as if somehow the public is not yet ready to be included.
But the public always is. It must be first to be included. Any other interpretation of “internal” communications has the understanding of how our government ought to function, and where the public fits in that system, backward. Taking this SRD issue as an example: we are certainly much richer, better informed and readier to be part of the conversation for having had this debate, however difficult at times, than if we had not had it–than if it had remained “internal.” It isn’t the internal process between commissioners, administrators and superintendent that should be given deference, but the public’s right to know about that process and the communications flowing in its veins. Anything else begs for clotting, and you know how that ends.
Carla says
Andy, did you read the letter? It reads much differently than this tale. Also, shouldn’t all of this be done in the open, not behind closed doors? The letter says a decision is made and a transition plan needs to be made. This is confusing.
Villein says
What a weak statement. I was not concerned about defunding the police because it was fairly obvious to everyone that wasn’t going to happen, except to the hapless, or possibly complicit, County Administrator. My issue is why send the threatening letter to the school superintendent? The County leadership makes one misstep after the next, folly upon folly, and that needs to stop. Commissioner Dance is not a breath of fresh air, he’s more of the same stale arrogance and incompetence that makes Flagler County what it is.
Either the very clearly written letter with explicit intent to end the County’s support was sent by a rogue employee, or it truly represented the intentions of the Board and now you are trying to step back from it. When you lead, you have to admit when you make a mistake, or do they not teach that at the Jerry Cameron Institute of Public Leadership?
palmcoaster says
Thank you Pierre I couldn’t have written it any better. Nothing was taken out of context (but maybe out in the sunshine instead) what written in the letter the school board received from Petito. Things in Florida need to be in the Sunshine and this is why we need change in 2024. Also I have to applaud Blindspotting as tells it like it is. Nepotism in the county? nahh . Our Palmcoasters ad valorem (yearly home tax) is split only 24% to Palm Coast and 42% whopping percent to the county and for what as on top the city pays about 10 millions a year to the Sheriff. Then to top it off FCBOCC Chair Dance says: I support an equitable “shared community effort” as Moore pointedly stated at the recent school board meeting. However, I don’t believe we will return to square one. I believe we can equitably and sustainably fund SRD’s that the entire community can rally around. Meaning he wants the 1,4 million to be paid by all in the community and not only by the county in few words?. In general I see kind of “beating around the bush reply” something often used by local government lately.
Celia Pugliese says
By the way Blindspotting is also right on point: What about some minority representative in the FCBOCC? Palm Coast had it history of minority representation in its council then when will happen on the County? Maybe 2024 is that time!
An astute observer of all in Palm Coast says
Celia,
Who runs for office and who gets elected from those running for office is the choice of the electorate.
Government agencies can’t designate a minority appointee to run and/or get elected. That’s unless you’re living in any one of the banana republic countries all over the world.
Also, before you push for a whole regime change in the form of the Flagler County Board of Commissioners, as your comments on Facebook state, (i.e., get rid of Klufus and vote for Kim Carney), you should really do a deep and comprehensive investigation into the candidates you’re pushing.
Throwing the baby out with the bathwater voting only leads to the complete mess we’re in at the present, and that means, City of Palm Coast as well as Flagler County Board of County Commissioners AS WELL AS the Flagler County School Board.
How about looking at specific campaign contributions for each candidate currently running for office so as to determine who’s backing each particular candidate (i.e., realtors, developers, out of town investors, out of town realtors, Captain’s BBQ in the form of Let It Be Realty, etc).
Based on your Facebook posts, you really need to scale back the rhetoric until you do some serious research into the candidates currently running for office. Kim Carney is an example. Do you know the entities contributing to her campaign, and if not, why not?
Roy Longo says
We are lucky to have Dance on the County Commission. He has been the voice of reason for nearly four years. We are in agreement that Dance would be a great asset to the school board but he is also a great asset to the county. We need to keep him right where he is.
Celia Pugliese says
Astute first of all if you are going to address me by name then why don’t you use yours other than an undercover alias? Maybe I have nothing to hide and you do? Your first line starts in the wrong foot as I never hinted the local government has anything to do with electing or not minorities, that is just your incorrect misinterpretation of my line. In your next line “only you are talking about a county regime” that probably you are immerse in and seemed to know it well then, I never said “regime” or extension of it. Could you please copy and paste the FB page were I called Mr. Klufas (Klufus) you maybe flagrantly inventing that one. unless was a typo. I may have shown my support for Carney yes versus her opponent. Also are you with your undercover alias cyberstalking me, because looks like? I may have really hit a nerve on you then. If you agree that we are in a mess now why then you show preference for some of the same for 2024. Because I do not want the same mess is why I like Carney. My support for some candidates is not a rhetoric and I do not go around telling anyone to scale back anything, specially hiding behind an alias.
Just Sayin says
This was a great article explaining everything. Anyone who questions Andy Dance’s integrity clearly does not know him. Thank you Andy for your service to Flagler County.
BLINDSPOTTING says
Roy Longo: Prove to us how Dance is a great asset, he has been there for 4 years
and what has he done to help his constituents???? Meanwhile he wanted to remove
SRO’s from the schools and had to walk it back when he met with parental resistance
with his “internal communication” and back room shenanigans, We understand that
all of his buddies are going to pull look at the shiny coin comeback. He’s the voice
of obfuscation not reason!
Flaglermom says
It’s amazing how many comments seem completely fake to give the idea that people stand behind this all (especially moms who vote). I have asked around at local gatherings, soccer games and elsewhere that moms meet up and guess what: we are all upset at this proposal. In terms of your “response”: there is much to unpack but at its core it is weak and though I think replies to you deserves a more public rebuttal (to hold your many weak points to account), I also feel compelled to reply here because I believe that you made an effort on damage control and created yourself / or asked friends to post fake happy, ra-ra comments to pretend people here think you are the best. It is nonsense and the people don’t think it anymore. I also think: you are lying about your intentions (a politician lying, no never, not you), you got caught (also never happens to politicians, so I am sure you’re telling the truth and I’m mistaken) and you want people to think you didn’t because you live here and are now dealing with public backlash in a very real sense everywhere you go but your aim is to move this forward nonetheless and that suggests you are a lobby for hire who will lie about the context of his intentions in hopes the public is confused about them. Most importantly, you are not concerned with a larger part of the growing population (the voters who will decide the next election) here and most of us do have school children still and we have made clear to you – we want you to leave this alone. People know how these things go and that in no way: will government magically discover some efficient and effective mechanism for spending and problem-solving that has never once anywhere history of the word been done but Flagler county is going to figure it out somehow though we can’t build walker bridges for less the multiple million dollars even when they remain largely unused, we give away prime real estate to temporary storage facilities, we have yet to learn how to manage traffic flow of the growing cities needs and we aim to cut many lower cost services like this that actually work instead to clearly nonsensical ones that are everywhere. This general understanding of how thing actually work is the reason people want you stop with this topic, because talks of budget and dismantling are actually very much the same thing, and you know it and it is why the sheriff raised the alarm in the beginning. Leave this program and its funding alone and find it somewhere else – there are many areas to look that don’t deal with children’s safety and you can find it there and that is how you get the public to get off your back and maybe take note as well: we are majority now and your days will be numbered if you keep this up. Our kids safety is not up for discussion. Whether R or D I will vote for anyone who stands against this topics further discussion in the next election and leaves things just how they are / because they are working and I am certain others will too. This isn’t national, it’s local and I just want the kids to be safe. We have very few things that we do correctly around here in government so take the win and stop trying to break them.