Commissioners had voted to terminate $7.5-million award
Terry Connor, superintendent of the Sarasota County Schools, has contended in a letter to Sarasota County Administrator Jonathan Lewis that a county staff member mischaracterized to the County Commission the School Board’s stance on its request to modify plans for a trades training program for which the commission in 2024 had provided the district $7.5 million.
His letter, dated Sept. 4, came nine days after the County Commission denied the proposal to change how the funds would be used and voted to terminate the agreement with the district.
During the Aug. 26 County Commission discussion about the proposed changes, Commissioner Joe Neunder asked Steve Hyatt, manager of the Resilient SRQ Program— through which the grant was awarded — whether School Board representatives had made it clear that district leaders would be unable or unwilling to pursue the trades program without those changes. “Or will they pivot and move back to the original intent, which was very site-specific to North Port” and the designated trades, Neunder asked.
Staff had talked several times with district leaders about those details, Hyatt replied. “It would appear that this is their desire,” he added, “and this is the only direction in which they’re going for.”
“I don’t feel comfortable moving goalposts,” Neunder told Hyatt. “I don’t feel comfortable being dictated to, [as in] ‘My way or the highway.’ ”
In his Sept. 4 letter, Connor wrote, “We … want to be clear that the District never represented that its proposed grant modification was a ‘take it or leave it’ proposition.” He did note that a letter that County Administrator Lewis had sent him about the Aug. 26 vote “appropriately acknowledges that the District never stated that the proposal was ‘take it or leave it.’ ”
The $7.5-million grant came out of the approximately $201.5 million that the county received from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to respond to unmet needs resulting from the damage that Hurricane Ian wrought countywide in September 2022. The funds are managed through what the county calls the Resilient SRQ Program.
The commissioners voted in September 2024 to award the HUD money to applicants who had participated in a competitive application process, Hyatt reminded the board members on Aug. 26.
Then-Commissioner Mike Moran had touted the trades training program — which would have focused on construction skills — as a means of preparing new workers who would be able to help facilitate faster recoveries from future hurricanes.
During his Aug. 26 presentation, Hyatt also explained that the modification of the School Board’s use of the grant funds would have to comply with the HUD stipulation that the majority of the beneficiaries would have to be from low- to moderate-income requirements.
Other applicants for the funds that ended up being designated for the School Board program at STC in North Port, Hyatt said, did meet the criteria related to construction trades training, based on the commission’s discussions of those criteria.
Then Hyatt explained that the $7.5 million was to support courses and programs on carpentry, electrical work, HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning] services, welding “and other related apprenticeship programs.”
On July 27, Hyatt reported, staff received the School Board request asking that money be allowed to go toward the purchase of furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E), as well as trades programs unrelated to construction.
In his Sept. 4 letter, Schools Superintendent Connor also disputed that characterization: “The proposed FF&E was not simply conventional furniture. A substantial portion consisted of equipment and other program-specific items essential to operating and building out the workforce development programs.”
Further, Hyatt told the commissioners, the School Board wanted to utilize the furniture, fixtures and equipment at the Sarasota Suncoast Technical College (STC) as well as at the facility in North Port.
“If this were to move forward,” he emphasized, these changes “would represent the first substantial amendments to the Sarasota County Hurricane Ian Action Plan,” which HUD staff had to approve before the board members awarded any grants.
Hyatt also pointed out that commission’s approval of the School Board’s July request would mean that the criteria were different from those advertised in regard to eligibility for applicants for the Hurricane Ian funding. Moreover, he explained, the amendment would have to be the focus of a 30-day comment period, as well as HUD approval after that period.
Further, Hyatt noted that HUD calls for a review to ensure that each project complies with federal environmental laws, so staff would have to undertake such an analysis of the Sarasota STC campus in that context. “That does add time and expense,” he added.
A request for the county to ‘reevaluate this matter’
In his Sept. 4 letter, Superintendent Connor stressed, “The District’s July 27 request was simply a formal request for the County to consider a different allocation of the existing award. The request did not seek an increase in the $7.5 million award. It proposed moving $5.49 million from the construction category to Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment while retaining the full grant amount for the project.”
Further, Connor explained, “The request [for the modification] aimed to maximize the amount of the grant that could ultimately be directed toward the project and provide direct benefit to the community. The request specifically stated that the District wanted to continue working collaboratively with the County to resolve outstanding issues and ensure compliance with grant requirements. At no point did the District communicate that the County had only one option. The amendment was a proposal for consideration and discussion.”
Further, he wrote, “The District understood that the County could approve the amendment or deny it and allow the project to continue under the original agreement. Before receiving notice on August 26, 2026, the District had not been told that termination of the entire award was under consideration, and it was not given an opportunity to proceed under the original terms before the County revoked the award.
“Perhaps most importantly,” Connor continued, “we were disappointed that no member of County Staff or the County Commission greeted or approached the District’s project team before or during the August 26 meeting to ask for additional context or clarification regarding the history of the project, the District’s substantial financial investment, the reasons for the proposed modification, or the District’s willingness to consider alternatives.”
Earlier in the letter, Connor had explained that the School District already had invested $1.4 million in design work, and it had “allocated approximately $15.1 million in additional capital funding to supplement the $7.5 million [grant] award and complete the project. This represents a significant commitment of local School District resources to a project that we believe will provide substantial long-term benefits to the North Port and South County community. The District has also devoted considerable time, staff effort, professional expertise, and other human capital to planning, designing, procuring, and advancing the project. If the project fails to come to fruition because of the grant revocation, these financial expenditures and committed resources, including the value of the District’s time and human capital, would constitute significant losses to the District directly attributable to the revocation.”
Moreover, Connor wrote, the construction estimate the District has received is $14.71 million, and it “does not include approximately $1.29 million for engineering and architectural services, $7.49 million for furniture, technology, safety systems, instructional equipment, and program equipment, or the $10,000 environmental-review allowance.”
Connor concluded his letter thus: “We respectfully request that County reevaluate this matter … and rescind the termination of the $7.5 million grant funds so that the District can move forward with providing workforce programs in North Port and South County community.”
County Administrator Lewis forwarded the letter to the commissioners on Sept. 4, the board’s email folder shows.
Neither Lewis nor any of the commissioners brought up Connor’s letter during their regular meeting on Sept. 8.
‘A lot of variances and scope changes’
Referring to the Resilient SRQ Program, Chair Ron Cutsinger said during the Aug. 26 discussion, “My understanding is that, in this process, the School Board was informed a number of times about following the procedures that are set out and qualifying for these funds …”
“Yes, that’s correct,” Hyatt replied.
“So there’s a lot of variances and scope changes from the original application,” Commissioner Tom Knight summed up Hyatt’s remarks.
Are the School Board members “certain that they can comply [with the HUD criteria]?” Knight asked.
“We ultimately — the five of us — are responsible for the compliance of the programs, and we’re on a timeline now,” Knight added. Referring to the latter, he expressed concern about whether the money could be spent by HUD’s deadline, with all the new steps staff would have to take if the commissioners approved the changes.
“We’re ultimately on the hook as a board, right?”
“Yes,” Hyatt responded. Again, Hyatt said, “We do have to get HUD’s approval of the substantial Action Plan amendment,” adding that staff had no way of knowing whether HUD would approve that.
He reminded the board members that HUD would “claw back” the $7.5 million if its staff learned the School Board program did not meet the necessary income criteria.
“I’m a huge fan of our school district and our School Board,” Knight responded. Nonetheless, he said, “I can’t support the changes,” knowing that the $7.5 million could be used for another purpose.
“I do agree with Commissioner Knight,” Commissioner Mark Smith told Hyatt. “The application was clear …”
When the commission approved the School Board application, Smith said, nothing in the plans called for the purchase of furniture and equipment for the STC campus at the intersection of Beneva Road and Proctor Road in Sarasota.
Further, Smith noted, “I personally don’t want to jeopardize losing the money. As with everything, there’s more need than money.”
“I want to take just a slightly different approach on this one,” Commissioner Teresa Mast began when it was her turn to speak. “I stand 150% behind the school need for trades in construction.” Yet, she continued, she had reviewed the materials that were submitted to the Resilient SRQ staff and the commissioners in 2024, and she had watched the videos of the board discussions related to the training program funding.
She told Hyatt, “When your staff does due diligence” in regard to any application, the proposal has to meet the HUD requirement in regard to serving low- to moderate-income residents. The changes, based on a one-on-one discussion she had had with Hyatt prior to the meeting that day, found a very low percentage of the students would meet the income criterion. “We’re not even close to the 51% [required by HUD],” she added, saying the notes she had taken form that one-on-one discussion indicated a maximum of 3%. “So that’s very troubling to me.”
Mast pointed out, “I want this program to be successful.”
Above all,” she said, “It saddens me significantly” to think that the community will miss out on the potential of the program as originally described.
Then she noted, “We have some serious … needs for infrastructure, and I mean critical needs.”
Mast proceeded to cite projects to which the HUD funds could be awarded, including the long-needed improvements to South River Road.
“I can’t agree to this substantial amendment,” she said.
Commissioner Neunder, too, cited the potential of the HUD clawback of the $7.5 million. Moreover, he emphasized, the board members did not want to put the county in the position of having federal officials audit the Resilient SRQ Program in the future and determine that the $7.5 million money was used inappropriately.
Like Mast, Neunder suggested the potential that the funds could be allocated to the South River Road improvements.”
Chair Cutsinger added, “The one thing I’m feeling right now is disappointment. I remember the excitement surrounding this [application] … I just find it hard to understand why [the school district leaders] felt so strongly that they wouldn’t follow what everyone else has been required to follow” with the Resilient SRQ Program.
“I certainly can’t support this request,” Cutsinger added.
When Cutsinger asked what motion the board members needed to consider, based on their discussion, County Administrator Jonathan Lewis noted that denying the request for the modification is what the motion needed to do.
Commissioner Smith ended up making that motion, and Commissioner Knight seconded it. The motion passed 5-0.
Following the vote, County Administrator Lewis said staff would notify the school district of the decision. Then, at a later time, Hyatt would come back to the board members for a formal discussion about how the $7.5 million should be used.