Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Comments topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Public commenters challenge farm‑workers training grant and raise immigration concerns; grant remained on consent agenda

2173381 · January 29, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At the Jan. 28 Polk County School Board meeting, public commenters criticized a $316,260 farm‑workers training grant on the consent agenda and urged stricter vetting for immigrants. The consent agenda passed with the grant included.

During the public‑comment portion of the Polk County School Board meeting Jan. 28, two speakers addressed the consent agenda item described in the board packet as a farm‑workers training grant (Consent R, Subject 1) in the amount of $316,260.

Bobby Dee of Winter Haven described the grant as supporting training for adults and students age 14 and older and quoted the agenda language listing eligible recipient categories: U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, refugees, asylees, parolees and other immigrants lawfully admitted to work. Dee criticized the program and asserted—without providing evidence at the meeting—that most recipients were undocumented and made broader claims about immigration and public spending. Dee urged the board to use the funds “wisely.”

Glenda White, also of Winter Haven, urged the board to raise vetting standards beyond federal requirements and expressed concern that individuals who entered the U.S. without a background check could pose risks to students; she urged limiting district resources to people who entered at legal ports of entry and who are working. Both speakers framed their remarks as directed at the consent item; the board completed its consent vote later in the meeting and approved the consent agenda including the grant.

The comments were presented during the public‑comment period; no formal board policy or procedural changes were made on the record in response to the speakers. The district’s written description of the grant, as shown in the agenda materials, lists lawful eligibility categories; any changes to vetting or eligibility would require follow‑up by district staff and alignment with grant rules and federal/state law.