Legislative Joint Auditing-Educational Institutions

will stand adopted. Now to the review of reports and so we welcome our staffer who will give us that. Mr. Fink. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, good afternoon. Today we have 14 FY23 educational audit reports to review and one investigative report. Um, you're gonna see, uh, our deferred report, OCLA first, but, uh, if we can, we need to skip to that investigative report so that, um, Michelle can present it and then she's got to go to the city county meeting. OK, um, Michelle. You recognize. Thank you, Madam Chair. This report is issued subsequent to a review of questionable transactions brought to the attention of Arkansas legislative audit by the Southeast Arkansas Education Service Cooperative and Arkansas Department of Education. These transactions concern 2 recruitment and retention specialists employed by the co op, whose duties included visiting member school districts to provide support for novice teachers. The cooperative officials discovered that these employees charged time and mileage for visits that never occurred and an investigation by a law firm hired by the co op confirmed these improprieties. The objectives of our review were to examine the RRS school district visits for validity, determine overpayments received by each RRS for visits determined to be invalid. Our review period was primarily July 1, 2022 through May 23 May 23, 2023. Some background information on the novice teacher mentoring program. Arkansas code requires Arkansas public schools to provide mentoring for novice teachers, all districts may participate in a mentoring program funded by the novice teacher Mentoring Grant, a state grant that's administered by DESE. Desi coordinates the grant-funded mentoring program with education service cooperatives throughout the state and the cooperatives employ RRS to provide on-site mentoring and these RRS must hold an Arkansas teaching license. The Southeast Co op employed 2 RRS who were responsible providing support to novice teachers and whose salaries were 100% funded with a novice teacher mentoring grant funds. The co op maintained daily sign-in sheets and which RRS indicated their name, the time out and in, their destination, and the business explanation, and they submitted travel reimbursement forms to the co op for mileage expense related to each visit. The co op board placed each employee on administrative leave on May 23, 2023 after improprieties were discovered and both employees resigned shortly thereafter. Legislative audit confirmed that during the period July 1 of 2022 through May 23, 2023, the two RRS claim to have made a total of 250 on-site visits to member school districts to provide support to novice teachers. Our staff review of district sign-in sheets and written statements provided by teachers revealed that of these 250 on-site visits, only 5 visits could be confirmed as having occurred. 108 visits did not occur. It appears that the two RRS falsified sign out sheet entries and and submitted fraudulent travel reimbursement forms associated with these visits. As a result, the RRS received salary overpayments and improper mileage reimbursements totaling 23,236, as shown in exhibit one on page 2 of the report. 137 remaining visits and associated travel costs could not be confirmed due to inaccurte records and failure by two school districts to provide information requested by the law firm hired by the co op. Therefore, the actual amount of salary overpayments and improper mileage reimbursements could be significantly higher. Audit recommends that the co op management and DESE increase oversight regarding on-site visits to member school district. Additionally, audit recommends co-op management strengthen controls related to mileage reimbursements. It should be noted in a in a letter to audit dated August of 23 from the Assistant Commissioner of Fiscal Administrative Services states that DESE has been implementing changes to the novice teacher mentoring grant program over the past year to provide greater oversight. Those changes include designating a position to work directly with all of our novice teacher programs across the state, including on-site visits of school campuses to ensure the Efficiency of the program in increasing monitoring of the administration of this grant program at the Education Service cooperatives. Corrective action taken by the co op is listed in the in the appendix of the report. The co op board placed the two RRS on administrative leave on May 23rd. Of 2023 after the improprieties were discovered and both employees resigned shortly thereafter. In addition, at a meeting held on June 13th of this year, the Arkansas State Board of Education accepted recommendations from the professional licensure Standards Board ethics subcommittee for Disciplinary action against each employee, including probation of license for 2 years, assessment of of a $250 fine and the completion of required coursework and reading. This report has been forwarded to the 10th Judicial District prosecuting attorney and the Attorney General. Questions Questions from the committee. I have a quick one. Was any attempt made to recoup the monies that were incorrectly given to these two employees? To my knowledge, They have not because I didn't see anything in the report that indicated that the school district or the or the co op asked them to pay the money back. No, ma'am. All right, other questions? Yes, Representative. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, in reference to the two school districts that were requested by the law form, I guess the co op. Um, utilized to kind of get down to the bottom of this. Those two school districts, which one? Do we know who they does audit know who they are? And did they tell audit the information that they didn't get that law firm? Or excuse me, do you have? It is rather strange that the two school districts were not cooperating. And we need to know what they were up while we're waiting on that, is there another question? OK, we got the binder. While we're waiting on that answer, does anybody else on the committee have a question? Yes, sir. Mr. Andrews. Madam Chair, do we know if The, the people who are overpaid for these. I guess visits. Oh they got to repay this? I just asked that question and we don't have any idea. Yeah, we don't know whether they repaid it or not. I'm not sure they were given the option of repayment, but we do know that their license, uh, their professional licenses have been suspended for 2 years. So that's something that's they're supposed to pay $250 but there's no mention in here at all of them being made to pay back those fraudulently obtained funds. 50 is kind of just a slap on the wrist without a job that 250 can loom pretty large too. Thank you. I thought this information was going to be where I could quickly get my hands on it. As you can see there's a lot of information here, um, to answer your question, legislative audit did not reach out to those school districts, but what we did is we referred this to the prosecuting attorney and we provided the prosecuting attorney with that information of those two school districts that did not respond. Representative Dukes, I think one of the things this committee can do is request that DESE require all of these school districts who are receiving these services to cooperate when questions are asked by audit, which is where I think you're trying to go. It does not make sense that a school district would not, would not be compelled. To answer those questions. Exactly. I mean, it's troublesome that we don't know the answer to how much money out there because two school districts that are using taxpayers' money aren't answering the question. And I think that we have a duty to our constituents, you know, to to our taxpayers to know when something like this goes wrong with, with, with, with the money and find out, you know, get to the bottom of it. The audit should be the ability to do that. So I personally would like to know who the two school districts are, um, If we can, yeah, we can get that information for you I mean I don't know to what degree since he's been the prosecuting attorneys, but I, I think that we need to Make sure that they do know they need to be answering those questions. Those are relevant to audit and to, to, I think the public. I think that audit can work with Jesse and um making sure we have those, those entities identified for you in the December meeting. That's when we're meeting again, right? He said he can get it to you before then if you get it to staff before, share it with the totality of the committee. All right, thank you. Any further questions on this report? Is there a motion? It's been moved that we refuse our 2nd. Second its discussion on the motion. Seeing now will place to question. All those in favor please say aye. Oppose no. The motion carried. Thank you. Mr. Banks. OK, next is the, uh, if you'll go back to page one on your synopsis is, uh, Osceola School District, which was deferred, uh, from our last month's meeting. Uh, finding one during our review of board meeting minutes, we noted the following. On September 11, 2023, the board failed to adopt a motion to hire the superintendent's spouse as a novice teacher mentoring specialists. Subsequently, on September 26, 2023, the district executed the contract totaling $112,000 with a company owned by the superintendent's spouse for services for the novice teacher mentoring specialist position. This contract, which was not approved by the board, was for 8 months commencing on October 9, 2023, and concluding on May 31, 2024. On June 12, 2023. And again on July 20th, 2023. The board failed to adopt a motion to hire a family member of the assistant superintendent as an ESOL and dyslexia specialist subsequently, on August 25, 2023. The district executed the contract with a company owned by the previously mentioned family member for services pertaining to ESOL and dyslexia. This contract, which was not approved by the board, stipulated the district would pay the company $2600 per day for dates worked from July 11 to August 12, 2023. $201,220 for the remainder of the 2023, 2024 fiscal year. And $220,000 per year for the 2024-025 and 2526 school years. During audit procedures, we also noted that the district paid $6600 for services to the same company owned by the assistant superintendent's family member during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 without seeking approval from the board and commissioner of the Arkansas Division of Elementary and Secondary education as required by Arkansas Code. Failure to obtain board approval for contracts raises concerns relating to conflicts of interest and conflict with Arkansas code, which states in part an administrator's family members seeking to contract with the public educational entity employing the administrator shall first present the request with all relevant facts and circumstances justifying approval to the board currently employing the administrator at an open meeting. It should be noted that the superintendent resigned on March 14th. 2024 and the district notified the two companies that their respective contracts will be terminated effective May 31, 2024. Finding two during our examination of payroll records, we noted the following discrepancies. We could not verify that the district's stipend extra duty schedule was approved by the board. Stipend extra duties pay was not always indicated on the employees' contract or a denum to their contract. On November 3, 2022, the board approved a retention bonus to licensed personnel of $2500. During our testing of employees' compensation, we identified 5 licensed personnel were paid a retention bonus of $5000. Upon further examination, it was noted that 92 licensed employees were paid a total of $2,330,000 in excess of the approved amount. Finding 3. The district did not have adequate internal control procedures relating to the use of credit cards. Our examination of credit card payments for the year revealed. 21 transactions totaling $66,900 did not have adequate supporting documentation. 46 transactions totaling $43,000 did not indicate any form of approval or authorization. 40 transactions were made for lodging that were in excess of the IRS per diem rate, which is the district's established written policy. The total of the excess related to these transactions was $10,399. Fighting for during our examination of the March 2023 bank statement, we noted 4 payments totaling $85,000 were made electronically without board approval or an approved resolution in noncompliance with AD ADE's commissioner's memo and Arkansas code. Upon review, many bills were paid the auto draft and we're not recorded in the general ledger until year end closing. And the final finding, um, the district's bank accounts were unreconciled by $90,000 as of June 30, 2023. ALA staff identified 40, almost $42,000 of the unreconciled variants, leaving an unexplained variance of almost $49,000. Additionally, reconciliations with the superintendent's approval were not available for October 2022 through June 2023. And that concludes the findings for Osceola School District, um, that report was deferred so that, uh, officials could be here. Thank you so much, Mr. Fink, but Would you be so kind as to identify yourselves for the record? OK, hell members of the board. I am Tori and Bill and the current president of the Osceola School District. Now tell me your name again, sir. bail. Mr. Bale, OK, I am Charles Webster, Inner superintendent of the school district. OK. Hi, I'm Rebecca Warsham, and I'm an attorney for the OCla School District. And there's another guy down there with kind of gray hair. I don't know who he is, but he wants to be at the end of the table. What's your name? Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Joey Carr and uh Oil is in my district would either of you, the president or the interim superintendent here to make an opening statement. Mr. President. OK, um. Like I said, I am the current president of the Osola School District. How long have you been in that position, sir? I've been in the position for, well, for the position, um, less than a year. Yes, I've been on the board for 9, almost 9 years now. Yes, ma'am. Um, we understand that we are stewards of the districts. Uh, financial policy, the public funds, and we take full responsibility for the actions. Um, we're here because we want our dress to findings that were in the audit as well, so if you have any questions. I guess we can ask. Any of one of us, brother? Well, certainly we will do that, but would you like to make is that your opening statement, Mr. Superintendent? Would you care to make a statement? How long and tell us how long you've been in your current position. I'm sorry, I was just hired as the superintendent as the interim superintendent in January. In January, and these findings took place when, Mr. Fink? Under a previous, uh, superintendent. And this financial person. No, you're the attorney you have I'm the attorney, um, I think it's important that, uh, we discussed the Contracts that were with the former administrator's, um, family members, um, that's what's noted in the finding that the former superintendent brought to the board, um, during the regular meetings in June or July of 2023. Um, he recommended at that time for the board to hire the former assistant superintendent's sister as the district's, uh, dyslexia coordinator as well as the ESO coordinator at the time, the board did not approve that hire. Then the person got paid anyway. Well, the board, I'm going to get the board did not approve her to be unemployment. And then um during the, um, September 2023 meeting, the former superintendent recommended that the board hire his wife as the no best teacher mentor. The board did not approve that hire. Um, at the board's December 2023 meeting. Um, the board members started looking at bills that were on to be paid and board members were asking questions, um, at that time and learned about these consultant contracts that were owned a company that was owned by the former assistant superintendent sister and then a company that was owned by the former assistant superintendent's wife. At that time, um, I believe, well, in January I was contacted by a board member. I was at that time, that was the first time I was aware of these contracts. I was not consulted before these contracts were entered. I had a working relationship with both the former administrators and, um, I would have thought based upon their, um, relationship with me, they could call me at any time if they had a legal question about how to do something that did not occur here at all. Um, So in January of 2024, the the board voted to place the superintendent on administrative leave. They can hired an outside investigator to look into these contracts. The investigation, um, found that the former superintendent improperly improperly contracted with the former assistant superintendent's sister to provide Eol and dyslexia services and properly contracted with the wife's company to provide Nova's teacher and mentoring services, and then he, um, contracted. with these companies as consultants but under their company name as a guy, so it would go undetected by the school board. Once these findings were um. Presented to the board, they voted, um, to begin termination proceedings based upon these findings as well as the fact that these contracts were not author, you know, we did not have that resolution. We know that's required by law as well as the ADE commissioner's approval. Um, we started termination proceedings and then the former superintendent resigned and then subsequently the former assistant superintendent as well as the port, um, Former district treasurer have also resigned. And if anybody has any further questions on that, um. Questions of the folks from most of the committee members. Representative Dukes Duke. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm kind of trying to formulate it. I have a couple of questions. I have one for staff is the novice, novice teacher mentoring program that we're talking about with this Osceola is it the same program that we just referenced in the co op over here. Or is it two different programs? Or do we turn mine. Um, this is specific to this school district, I believe, um, I don't think it's the, I don't think, I don't believe it's the same program as what we saw in the co op. OK, I just wondered if it was, it was a connection with a grant or anything like that because it makes if it is, it certainly makes us wonder a little bit about our oversight and that we need to do a better job on it. Um, a question for you all, if I may, um, so the timeline, they you, they brought it to your, to the board and you all did not To prove it. And then it was later that fall that you guys started seeing, but it was not, that would have been 2022 or 2023. 23, they were executed during and so then in 2024, so you kind of Start asking these questions pretty quickly from what I can tell. So I, I wanted to commend you for asking questions because I know oftentimes in training, school board members get told, you don't need to ask a whole lot of questions you don't need to, you have short meetings, hour, hour and a half long, you're not, I think you've heard some of this before, and your job is to ask questions for these purposes together, you know, all together is to ask questions and to, you know, trust but verify, um, what's going on. And so I do appreciate that when you Found out or had some concerns, you pursued it because that is your job. So thank you for asking questions and being diligent on that. For the questions for the Osceola School District. Is there a motion? Is there a motion for review? Of the report? Uh, Representative McCullum moves. Is there a second? Reanne uh Miss Davis is second its discussion on the motion. See, I'm gonna place the question. All those in favor please say aye. Oppose no. I personally want to thank you all for coming. Because you could have continued to overlook the problem, and you did not, and we appreciate you journeying to Little Rock to explain what is going on and we wish you Godspeed as you pursue educational excellence for all of your kids. Thank you so much. Thank you. Mr. Fink, you recognized. OK. Um, if you will skip down to page 8 in your report, um, that's the Palm Bluff School District audit which had repeat findings and they have, um, folks here, so I, I didn't want to, uh, make them wait any longer. Um, you come to the table, please. You go ahead, summarize it to us, while they're on their way. OK, so, uh, the district had 9 findings total, um, I'm not going to read each finding, but we'll try to provide a brief summary. Findings 12, and 3 were related to federal programs, uh, finding one was related to an issue with budgeting, um, on Title One, And then we had a finding related to, uh, two findings related to Esser funding. The first was a repeat finding related to incentive pay being made to two employees who didn't, who did not meet the requirements for that incentive pay. And then additionally we noted 3 equipment items purchased with ESR funding that were not added to the equipment subsidiary ledger, which is required for federal compliance. Finding 4 was due to an unreconciled bank reconciliation variants at June 30, totaling $60,000. Finding 5 was related to receipts not being issued and entered timely into AppScan, which we noted during our testing of receipts. Uh, finding 6 was a repeat finding related to payroll disbursements during tested, testing, we noted clerical errors that led to overpayments and underpayments. Additionally, contracts were not available for 2 employees and 2 certified teachers were not properly licensed. Finding 7 was a repeat finding related to capital assets not being properly maintained. Finding 8 was related to unauthorized withdrawals from the district bank account. The district discovered these withdrawals and they did recover the funds from the bank. And then Finding 9 was related to gross salary overpayments totaling $74,000. The district discovered this and self-reported it to ALA, um, the district have recovered approximately $5200 at the audit report date. And that concludes the findings for Pine Bluff School District. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Would anyone from Pine Bluff like to make an opening statement? Identify yourself first for the record. I'm so sorry. Would y'all tell me who you are. Good afternoon, Jennifer Barbery, Superintendent at Palm Bluff School District. Yes, sir. Good afternoon, Cedric Rice, uh, chair, board of directors of Palm School District, alright. Jamie Reid, the district treasurer at Pine Bluff School District. Um, Would you like to make an opening statement, Madam Superintendent? Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Um, good afternoon. I would like to start by saying, um, that. I was appointed, a state-appointed superintendent in the middle of this fiscal year that, that you're looking at, uh, January 2023 is when I was appointed superintendent, the former superintendent that was a state appointed superintendent was removed, and I was put in that position and that, that January. So as we, um, and also I'd like it to be known that that January of 2023 is when we started working with a limited authority board, of which Dr. Rice is the board president of. Um, at that time, Miss Reed was not the district treasurer either. Um, so when we stepped in, when I stepped in as superintendent in January of 2023 from the beginning, we, I recognized, we recognize that there were several concerns with the finances. Um, most of those concerns were in regards to contracts. We couldn't find signed contracts, um, in the district. We were looking for those things. We knew that there were specific overpayments at that time, um, I know that Desi had Desi. Finance had been working with the district at the time and so these were some things that they had also brought to my attention when I was appointed as the superintendent, so I started looking for those things as well. So we, the overpayments were made to employees that no longer worked for the district, but they were still being paid. They were on the payroll. Um, we stopped that immediately that January. Um, there was, uh, concern of spending federal funds. There was an underspending of federal funds. There wasn't necessarily overspending, but the overspending that you see in the Finding was because the line item in federal grants management that our federal programs person turns in to state, it didn't match the line item in e finance, and it was because at that time the treasurer and the federal programs firstly weren't meeting regularly to look at and, and balancing basically their, their information. Um, and then, of course, the non-reconciliation of the bank statement every month was a large concern. I do know that that was something when I stepped in as superintendent that we That Almost weekly with Desi Finance and then certainly monthly, the treasurer, myself, and Desi Finance would meet and they would, um, provide recommendations and support with that treasurer to reconcile the bank statement, they would have opportunities to do that together and the treasurer at the time still was not doing it and following through with those recommendations. Um, in May of 2023, we non-renewed that district treasurer. And we began working while the district treasurer did not return after that non-renewal. And as you know, in the school world, the fiscal year runs June to January, July to June. And so that whole month of June, we did not have a district treasurer working where we were trying to Close up the books and make sure everything was correct. And all transparency, Ms. Reed was a support person from the Department of Education, Desi, and she was in district helping us, so she helped us close out our books that fiscal year, um, as a state support, and then, um, we basically self-reported almost everything that you see in the findings. We knew most of it was there. Any other statement, Mr. Chair, you want to say anything? Oh, I'd just like to say, um, um, you know, we were in transition and she mentioned that you know we just recently got out of out of state control and one of the things that we, we advocated for when we went to the Board of Education was to continue to receive support from ADE to help us get our books in order so that we clean up those those issues so we don't have all the findings and so uh I think we're moving in the right direction. Let me just say what my concern is, and I'll say it to you and to the committee, is that a lot of this took place while you were under state control, am I correct? Yes, ma'am. I said that's why it's just mind boggling to me. that the state was in charge of your district for how long? 6 years, 5 years? Palmll School District, it was a total of 5, OK, because it's supposed to be just 5, but you know they managed to stretch it out to 6 in the midst of that, uh, Dolaway School District annexed in the to the district, so basically that's why it seemed like 6 like forever, didn't it Ms. Park. Congratulations on your new position. I know most of this did not happen on either one of your watches, but we, we now are where we are and I think that the committee and y'all hear me gripe about it all the time. When you have school districts under state control and we. Still get these kinds of reports. We need to look at state control. Because this did not happen under the control of the local uh superintendent, local school board, but the superintendent of schools was the head of the department of ed the school board was the the chair of the Department of E, all of these things were under one person. And so when we're looking at this, I want us to be cognizant of the fact that during this whole time. They have had findings continually. And here they are today having to answer for those findings over which they had no control. Which y'all agree. I, I would agree. I would say there was an adjustment, a change in the way the state started supporting the district under, um, the new secretary, well, not even at the end, I would say the in the end tenure of the old secretary Burke and the new, um, because of more of the Office of coordinated Support and Services, that depart that group were more involved in boots. So I, I hate to use the word, but this is what they say, boots on the ground, they're actually in district, um, I think the fiscal side. Of it, uh, as far as debt requests, I mean, there's oversight, daily oversight from, uh, from Desi in regards to how the fiscal support is, is if there's daily oversight, how did you get here? Uh. And and I'm gonna Not being on. It's, it's a rhetorical question. Those that are not honest, that are working for the district in Miss and Miss misrepresenting the truth. Now, are you the only elected school board member that we have yet in Pine Bluff where is the whole board elected now because it was I'm still appointed. We still appointed. We staggering our elections, we coming up on our first cycle now. And how is that gonna work? Are you going to be returned to full local control, or is it going to be one at a time, which is unlike anything I've ever heard of in my in my entirety. Well, we advocated for it because we want stability because we know historically there have been some situations where local control has been returned and then the state had to come back in and take it again. So y'all are happy with the pace then. Yes, OK, I am happy as long as y'all are happy, I'm happy. I don't understand it because when it says return to local control, that usually means return to local control, but instead We're doing it piecemeal in Pine Bluff one person at a time or one position at a time, is that correct? It's a staggered election at this time, uh, November 5th, we'll have two board members up for election the next November, there'll be one, and then the next following November there will be 1 and then 2 and 2. We have 7 board members, so within 5 years school board elected over 6 years, 55 years. Yes, ma'am. Dare I ask what sense that makes? Continuity. Uh-huh. OK. Other questions for Pine Bluff? If not me, I hear emotion. been moved. Is there a second? Moved and seconded to review this report, discussion on the motion. Seeing now will place the question. All those in favor, please say aye. We thank you all very, very much for being with us and thank you good luck. Thank you so much, everyone staggering works out. Mr. Fink, OK, if you will go with me to page 4 now. Sorry. Um, we had one, report that was referred to the bomb certified to the bomb board, and then it's also referred to the PA and AG as part of that. Um, Lone Oak School District had 3 findings. The first one district administration discovered and we verified on a test basis, missing funds related to a school fundraiser. Our review revealed that cheerleading fundraiser, fundraiser proceeds of $2500 were deposited into the district bank account. However, district officials verified through contacting donors that $425 in proceeds intended for the fundraiser were sent to a payment app utilized by the Cheer spons. rather than deposited into the district's bank account. The cheer sponsor was terminated from employment on October 13th, 2023 and charged with theft of property on November 30th, 2023. Finding two in August 2022, the district received a, uh, FFA grant totaling $2300. The FFA sponsor provided invoices to support only $304 in purchases with grant funds, leaving $1,996 unaccounted for. In addition, the FFA sponsor purchased $5700 in products for a fundraiser. However, fundraiser proceeds were not turned over to the district treasurer, district officials were unable. To locate any of the fundraiser items or identify the amount of fundraiser proceeds. The FFA sponsor resigned from employment on September 14th of 2023. And the Lona Police Department, uh, is currently investigating the matter as of the end of the report date. Finding 3 Two unauthorized withdrawals totaling $4900 were made from the district's bank account on January 6th of 2023. Bank personnel discovered the unauthorized withdrawals and the funds were recovered from the bank, and that concludes the findings for Lone Oak School District. Questions for Mr. Fink. What is the pleasure of the committee? Don't everybody talk at once. You want a motion, you want to bring them in for discussion? What, what, what is the will of the body? Do I have a motion? Is there a second? Mr. Andrews, OK, it's a 2nd, uh, although, is there a discussion on the motion, Mr. Andrews, you had your hand up. I kind of would like to hear from about the, uh, to from the Lone Oak School District. Yes, Mr. Fink wants to add some context if that'd be OK. So, um, based on court filings, she was charged with theft of property on, on April 22nd, um, and the ethics board also took action related to this matter. Thank you OK Sorry, I just found some information out. I've been. Asking somebody to do something wrong on the committee. Sorry about that. Sorry about that. What's the pleasure of the committee? Do you want to bring them in? For discussion? Any objections to bringing them in for a discussion. Seeing no objections to bringing them in for a discussion we can bring them in in December. We will not be having a meeting in November, if I'm correct. December 5th or something like that, is that right? OK, December 5th. Well, that objection, we'll bring them in. All right, Mr. Fink, continue. Next report for review is on page 7, which is Nevada School District. And they had one finding, it was referred to the PA and the AG. The district certified personnel policy states that licensed personnel will be paid $50 per day for accumulated sick leave days over the maximum of 90 days at the end of each contract year and $50 per day for each accrued sick day upon retirement. District policy does not indicate classified personnel are to be paid for unused sick leave during our audit we noted the following the payroll preparer, a classified employ. issued himself a check based on his daily pay rate, totaling $32,000 for unused sick leave on his last day of work without approval. Um, that concludes the findings. I will add the superintendent reached out to me earlier this week. Um, I think he had called the PA to see, um, what, if anything, was being done. And then the school district's board passed a new policy, um, addressing the issues that were noted during the audit. Questions of Mr. Fink. was the pleasure of the committee. May I have a motion? Motion to review. Is there a second? Second its discussion on that motion. Seeing now place the question. All those in favor, please say aye. Opposed no. Motion carries. Mr. Frank. Moving toward the end. Uh, the remaining 10 reports contain findings that were not referred to the PA or the AG and they did not contain repeat findings, uh, management from each school district provided responses, um, to each finding. Staff recommends that these reports be filed en masse as reviewed. All right. Without objection, we will adopt these en mass. All right, is there anything else that should come before the committee. Thank you so very, very much for your due diligence, both members and non-members of the committee. Yes, Mr. Frank. Related to the investigative report, those two schools were Ford and Monticello, um, what we don't know for certain is if they just didn't have documentation to provide or did not provide documentation they had. Again, that matter has been referred, um, to the prosecutor. Duke. Thank you, Madam Chair, Sergeant. Shouldn't weren't they supposed to be keeping documentation of whether those people were showing up in their district or not. So they may not have even known they were supposed to come. That's the problem. Go ahead, Mr. That's even more concerning. Nothing to add to that. Never say anything quite like that, ladies and gentlemen, if there's nothing else to come before the body, we stand adjourned.