P1: Standing Committee / Board Meeting Report
P2: SD61 Applicable Bylaws / Standing Committees / Letters from BC School Boards
P3: Disclaimer / SD61 Backgrounder
P4: District PAC (aka DPAC, VCPAC) Constitution excerpts
Links for more info /sources underlined.
Sticky post: Motions and Trustee Voting Records January 2012 – March 2015. The District now posts a record of motions carried, but the motions that fail are equally interesting.
Mon May 4 7 pm Ed Policy Richmond School (George Jay)
Mon May 11 7:30 pm OPPS
Tues May 19 7:30 pm Board meeting
Board Special Budget Meeting, April 22/15
A. Commencement of Meeting
A.1 Approval of Agenda: Adopted (after debate and vote below) . Opposed: Leonard, Whiteaker
Orcherton: Motion to remove C.1 b) i as it is out of order. And it is a contractual issue. / Defeated. / For: Ferris, Leonard. Orcherton, Whiteaker Against: Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr, Watters
- McNally: Objection: It is the role of the Chair, not individual trustees to make the judgment that a motion is out of order, or not. As that has not taken place, the meeting will decide on the merit of the motion when debate gets to that point on the agenda.
B. Public Presentations on the 2015-16 Budget ( 3 GVTA presenters were listed on the agenda but did not attend; Cindy Graf, GVTA Pro-d Chair read their statements on their behalf.)
- Graf: Because of inability to bargain this other than provincially, was hoping to have a local line item created.
- Teresa Stokes, GVTA: I work at Eagleview; we do lots of Pro-d there.School based pro-d is amazing.There is pro-d from Learning Initiatives [a $440,00 department focused on teacher pro-d], School-based pro-d, and the Enhancing Learning Fund [a $120,000 fund dispensed to applicants from from the Superintendent’s office]. Recently I took an Aboriginal pro-d day, 1 BCTF day which was granted on request, and 1 social justice pro-d day, also granted after request, to attend the demolition of St Michael’s School in Alert Bay. Will follow up with a Project of Heart with Nella Nelson, Coordinator of Aboriginal Nations Education . [Chair asks Stokes to wrap up – exceeded 5 minutes.]
C. 2015/16 Annual Budget
C.1 2015/16 Annual Budget Debate
a) Recommended Motions:
i) That the Board approve carrying forward the $8,300,000 to the 2015-16 school year to be applied against the deficit. / Carried. Unanimous.
- Secretary-Treasurer: Operations budget contains main expenditures of SD61. Special purpose funds: CommunityLINK, Learning Improvement Fund, Provincial Resource program funds, Annual Facilities Grant. Capital fund holds the capital assets of SD61 (Land, buildings, equipment, vehicles). Carry forward funds from 1 time only savings each year. the only way to finally address this $8.3 million structural deficit would be to lay off people.
- Nohr: Supporting this does not mean supporting the budget, right?
- Ferris: Has been a difficult process, especially for the Secretary-Treasurer over years of deficit. Thanks to Secretary-Treasurer for help and guidance through the process.
- Orcherton: Acknowledge work of Secretary-Treasurer.Cuts not easy to make; imply reduced services. Kids will be affected. $66,000 deficit – it’s more than that and will mean more shared work.Some services will be slower, or not there.
- Leonard: Acknowledge work of Secretary-Treasurer and Department. Have delayed hiring; have been working on this since last July.
ii) That the Board approve the list of proposed budget options including eliminating the English Language Learners Administrative Assistant and reducing the administrative supplies budget for a total of $66,501 for the 2015-16 school year. / Carried. Unanimous.
b) New Business
Nohr: That the Board create a line item in the 2015-16 budget bringing teachers’ professional development funding to $150 per full time FTE; costs to be covered from current professional development funds for teachers. / Defeated. For: Nohr, Watters Against: Ferris, Leonard, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Orcherton, Whiteaker
- Nohr: Hoping to create a teachers’ professional development line item, but am reviewing information from the Secretary-Treasurer and from the GVTA. Motion to refer to May Operations meeting. / Defeated. For: Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr, Watters Against: Ferris, Leonard, Orcherton, Whiteaker
- Nohr: Appreciate the information shared by the GVTA – spent so much time putting the package together; thanks to Secretary-Treasurer and Superintendent for information as well. Strongly support an increase in pro-d funding for teachers.
- Ferris: Thanks to the GVTA for the many letters about pro-d from teachers to Trustees. No one would argue that pro-d is not important. But it is a contractual issue.
- Orcherton: All said about pro-d is true, but using the wrong reasons and this is the wrong place. Dealing with pro-d at this table is wrong and inappropriate, and sets a dangerous precedent. Not going to create line item – that would add to the structural deficit. Wording of the motion was taken directly from the GVTA newsletter.
- McNally: Point of order: Confine debate to the merits of the motion, not guesses about the motivation of the person who crafted the motion or where the wording came from.
- Orcherton: I don’t believe the GVTA’s numbers are correct but I’m not going to go there. The GVTA wants to have all pro-d money funnelled through them, rather than the employer having some control.
- Watters: Speak to the motion.
- Orcherton: I am! I don’t support the motion. For numerous reasons, not supporting.
- McNally: This proposal is not a matter of looking at a contractual anomaly and interpretation as the 8th day pay agreement was. It is important to adhere to contractual language. Ignoring the contractual language to benefit an employee group at one time a could be used as a precedent to ignore the language to that employee group’s detriment at another time. Possibly the GVTA does not have a great hope of success opening a table for negotiations. As a former teacher I understand the value of self-directed pro-d and have “saved up” so I could go to a conference every 3 years since the funding is so low.
- Superintendent: $368,000 from the BC Education Plan was directed to pro-d. Have worked with the GVTA on these funds.
- Loring-Kuhanga: Not in support of the motion. The Superintendent has worked with the GVTA to develop pro-d.
- Nohr: Many teachers hoped some of the money would be directed back to the Joint Fund. Teachers are telling us what they need; we are here to respond to their needs.
- John Bird, VCPAC President: VCPAC has had discussions about staff support. Have prepared a motion asking for funding to come from the Ministry for inservice and professional development so the system can move forward. Most Ministry initiatives aren’t funded so no wonder they don’t succeed.
C.2 2015/16 Annual Budget Bylaw
a) Recommended Motions
i) That the Board agree to give all 3 readings of the 2015-16 Annual Budget Bylaw at the meeting of April 22/15. / Motion to be carried unanimously. [See SD61 Bylaws Bylaw.] / Carried. Unanimous.
ii) That the Board 2015/16 Annual Budget Bylaw in the amount of $206,361,204 be read 1st, 2nd, 3d time , passed and adopted 22nd day of p April 22/15, and that the Chair and Secretary-Treasurer be authorized to sign, seal and execute this Bylaw on behalf of the Board. / Carried. For: Ferris, Leonard, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Orcherton, Watters, Whiteaker Against: Nohr
D. Needs Budget Letter
- Watters : Using this letter as a letter to the community. Is limited in terms of the limited data used to generate it but funding challenges are still evident.
- Ferris: Motion to approve the letter. / Carried. Unanimous.
- Nohr: CCs are good for sending the letter to the Minister, but would be good to have signatures of all partner groups for the community presentation. Principals and Vice Principals fall under “Administration”. Will there be a blanket media release?
- Chair: Assumed it would go in the newspaper.
- Nohr: Needs to be at least 1/8 page.
- Bird: Have issue with the letter. Trying to create a collaborative process and VCPAC was not involved in writing it at all. Will take it to next meeting and discuss whether to sign or not.VCPAC has sent out 2 letters about underfunding already.Will be coming back to classroom resourcing. Will require additional funding for what we are asking for. But need the vote of the membership to sign this.
- Gilles LaRose, President CUPE382: 382 will support. Initial concern with narrow focus but now that is broader.
- Benula Larsen, President, GVTA: GVTA will sign, though recognizing the reality of underfunding is not addressed.
- CUPE 947 representative: CUPE 947 will endorse. Need more CUPE staff and underfunding prevents that.
- Melanie Houston, President, Allied Specialists: We were not part of developing this letter, and don’t see anything about ASA, but thanks for writing the letter. ASA can support it. However, need to add “adequate specialist support such as an increase to Speech-Language Pathologist support”. Used to be 12 SLPs with a 75 student case load each, now cut to 8 SLPs with 150 or more for each case load. 40 of these students are designated “low incidence”. Only 10% of or practice is articulation. Twenty years of cuts have left devastation. No Learning Improvement Fund money was allocated for Education Assistants for SLPs. Students get 10 hours of service in all. The case loads are such that the SLP can’t actually deliver the service but must demonstrate and have a CUPE Education Assistant deliver the actual speech therapy.The expertise in schools is amazing but should not turn an EA loose without support from SLP close oversight. The degree of support for “low incidence” designated students is heartbreaking. Thee are redig challnges tht depend on the abityt to decode sounds. Every kindergarten child is screened but SLPs don’t have time to serve all who need support.By November we can tell which children will be designated Learning Disabled, and we don’t have time to refer them. [General gratitude re hearing from ASA on this.]
- Leonard: We look forward to Mr. Bird’s support. Could sign now, make small changes.
- Watters: Need to start needs budget earlier so no one has to search for themselves in this letter. Do we have to wait for VCPAC?
- Leonard: Change the date to May 1 in case of VCPAC signature. Could take VCPAC off.
- Watters: Or leave on, and unsigned.
E. Notice of Motion
E.1 Whiteaker: That the Board create a Parent Education Fund as part of the 2015-16 budget item “parent Advisory Council Grant” in the amount of $7,000, and further, that the Board create guidelines and a process to access this parent Education Fund. / This motion will appear on the agenda of the May OPPS meeting.
F. Adjournment: 8:35 pm