Citizen Portal

Mobile County board approves renovations, leases and grouped personnel and consent items

Mobile County Public Schools Board · October 30, 2025
Article hero
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

The Mobile County Public Schools board approved multiple grouped action items including a $1.925 million culinary arts renovation contract, an architectural selection, a small hunting lease, personnel actions, consent agenda items and expulsions; the board adopted the agenda and directed legal review on certain privacy issues.

The Mobile County Public Schools board approved a package of routine and capital items at its meeting, including awards and personnel actions presented as grouped motions.

The board approved action item G51 to award the culinary arts renovation contract to Tyndall Construction, the lowest bidder, for $1,925,000 from local funds for work at several high schools. The board also approved the architectural sub‑selection for a Central Jack Williams project, choosing Ward Scott Morris and noting the funding source as state legislative funds. An execution of a hunting lease with Harold Shields for the Ben Hamilton tract (40 acres) was approved; the lease's financial impact to the district was listed as $630 over two years.

Multiple grouped approvals were completed by voice vote: action items G32 through G50 were approved (including C32, $10,000 from Mobile County Commission funds to purchase metal benches), flow‑through federal funding items for private/parochial schools were approved as a block, consent agenda items including a $5,000 Carl Perkins grant for the Alba Shrine Center career day were approved, and personnel items G61–G70 were approved (one board member recorded opposition). The board also approved recommended student expulsions 1–6 and accepted settlements presented by HR and counsel.

The board adopted the meeting agenda by common consent and asked the superintendent and counsel to review privacy/legal issues raised during discussion of classroom cameras. No items were tabled; motions recorded in the meeting carried by voice vote unless noted otherwise.