Trustee Voting Records: January 2012 – Present

This is an unofficial summary of all motions brought to Standing Committees and Board Meetings of School District 61 Greater Victoria (City of Victoria, Oak Bay, Esquimalt, View Royal, and part of Saanich) since January 2012, when I started my first term as Trustee, and all Trustees took office, after the November 2011 civic elections.

Page 3

September 2012 Standing Committees And Board

September 10 2012 Combined Ed Policy / OPPS

  •  “Revision to Policy and Regulation 2120.030, formerly Director of School Services revised to District Principal of Learning Initiatives“, presented to the Board by senior administration for approval. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, McNally, Orcherton   Against: Loring-Kuhanga, Nohr
  • Motions on the Carbon Neutral Capital Program and Playground Equipment Funding Capital Project. /  Carried unanimously, giving the Board access to some funding for these projects.
  • Give all three readings of Capital Project Bylaw No. 126511, being a bylaw for playground equipment funding in the amount of $122,451 at September 17 Board meeting. Carried unanimously.
  • Orcherton: Board direct senior management to review all Board practices, policies and bylaws with respect to the Board’s interaction with the Public with the view to clarify, educate and, if necessary, recommend any improvements to these practices and policies. / Moved to amend: McNally: include District stakeholders and all interested Trustees. / Amendment defeated: For: McNally; Against: Alpha, Ferris, Loring-Kuhanga, McEvoy, Leonard, Nohr, Orcherton. Motion to refer original motion to to October 9 OPPS. /  Defeated. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, McEvoy   Against: Leonard, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr, Orcherton.   Back to main motion. /  Carried.  For: Ferris, Horsman, McEvoy, Leonard, Orcherton    Against: Alpha, Loring-Kuhnaga, McNally, Nohr   [Bylaw 9220 gives Regulations only to senior administration.)
  • Loring-Kuhanga: Board meeting agenda include a standing item for 2 Question and Answer periods to allow for public questions at the beginning of every meeting and at the end of every meeting. Also to amend By-Law 9360 regarding Agenda format that includes two Question and Answer periods. Leonard  ruled out of order as is the same motion that was defeated at May 14, 2012 OPPS. Advised that it could be put on the September 17 Board meeting agenda. The “out of order” ruling of the chair was challenged (no opportunity to explain the reason for the challenge).  Chair sustained : For the chair’s ruling: Ferris, Horsman, McEvoy, Leonard, Orcherton      Against: Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr (Robert’s Rules says that the same motion can’t be brought back in the same “session”. Each meeting of the Board is a “session”. But Robert’s Rules have been called “nit-picking” in OPPS.)
  • Loring-Kuhanga: Establish a Hiring Committee that includes Trustees to begin the process for recruiting a Secretary-Treasurer. / Defeated: Against: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, McEvoy, Leonard, Orcherton   For: Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr
  • McNally, with amendment from Loring-Kuhanga: Add “unfinished business” to Board agendas, and move public disclosure of In Camera Items” to Number 7 (earlier, as it’s close to the end now) on the agenda. / Defeated. Against: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton     For: Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr

September 17, 2012 Board Meeting

  •  Board adopt revised Policy 2120. 030, District Principal of Learning Initiatives. (The associated Regulation, the responsibility  of senior administration, carries automatically if the Policy carries.) Nohr: Motion to refer back to Ed Policy for further discussion.  Defeated.  Against: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton For: Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr  Back to main motion. / Carried. For: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton Against: Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr
  • Orcherton: Board direct senior management to review all Board policies, practices and bylaws with respect to the Board’s interaction with the Public with the view to clarify, educate, and if necessary, recommend any improvements to these practices and policies. / Carried. For: Orcherton, Horsman, McEvoy, Leonard, Ferris     Against: Alpha, Nohr, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally.  (Creation of a Policy Review and Development Committee has been proposed, and defeated. )
  • All three readings of Capital Project Bylaw No. 126471, being a bylaw for the Carbon Neutral Capital Program Energy Study in the amount of $7,317. / Carried unanimously.
  • All three readings of Capital Project Bylaw No. 126511, being a bylaw for playground equipment funding in the amount of $122,451. / Carried unanimously.
  • The internally restricted surplus appropriation as shown on Statement 1 of the Financial Statements, being held for school level funds (Note A), unspent project budgets (Note B), purchase order commitments (Note C), and the previously approved budgeted surplus (Note D) be approved. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, McNally, Orcherton, Nohr   Against: Loring-Kuhanga
  • The June 30, 2012 unrestricted operating surplus of $1,336,261 be carried forward to be applied towards the 2013/2014 projected deficit. (The deficit is forecast to be in the $7 million range.) / Carried.  For: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton Against: Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr
  • Approve year-end audited financial statements. / Carried unanimously.
  • Approve schedules required by Financial Information Act for July 2011 – June 30 2012. / Carried unanimously.
  • Nohr: Develop a class size and class composition report, to include the distribution of students by grade level as well as those identified as ESL, ELL, international students, students with IEPs including gifted students and the allocation of educational assistants to be provided to the Trustees for the In-Camera meeting prior to the October, 2012 public board meeting. Leonard: ruled the motion out of order. Alpha challenged the chair. No chance to explain or debate the merit of the challenge. Immediate vote resulted in chair sustained,  5-4. Motion ruled out of order and not dealt with. (The normal practise – according to Robert’s Rules of Order – is that the Chair will say to the challenger, “State your challenge”. That provides an opportunity for everyone – Trustees, and the public – to hear the reason for the challenge so people can consider the substance of the challenge, and debate the propriety of the challenge. After debate on the challenge, a vote is taken. But in SD61 there is only a quick vote to sustain the chair or not.  So in SD61, a vote on a challenge to the Chair is made with insufficient information, since no one but the challenger knows what the challenge was about.) [Changed by future  motion from McNally.]
  • Loring-Kuhanga: Board public board meeting agenda include a standing item for 2 Question and Answer periods to allow for public questions: at the beginning of every meeting and at the end of every meeting. Also to amend By-Law 9360 regarding Agenda format that includes two Question and Answer periods. / Defeated.  For: Alpha, Loring- Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr     Against: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton

October 2012 Standing Committees and Board

October 1, 2012 Ed Policy

  • Board of Education adopt the following: Revised Policy and Regulation 2212.2: District Principal Special Education Services. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Nohr, Orcherton  Against: McNally (The position was formerly District Principal, Student Support Services, (District Special Education and High Incidence Programs). The changes include a reassignment of responsibilities and changes the position from receiving “evaluation” to being “supervised”, as well as other changes. Not everyone agreed that supervision is the same as evaluation.)
  • Board of Education adopt the following: Revised Policy and Regulation 2127.060: Psychologist. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Nohr, Orcherton Against: McNally
  • Board delete the following as the position longer exists in the District: Policy and Regulation 2127.061 Psychometrician. Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Nohr, Orcherton   Against: McNally

October 9, 2012 OPPS:

  • Support Oak Bay High School application to School Community Connections program for community television community production teaching centre.Carried  unanimously.
  • Approve five year Capital Plan including 3 seismic upgrades, a mechanical /energy upgrade, 3 building envelope projects, 2 replacement schools and 2 school additions. / Carried unanimously.

October 15, 2012 Board Meeting

  • Board adopt revised Policy and Regulation 2212.2, District Principal, Special Education Services. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton    Against: McNally, Loring-Kuhanga, Nohr
  • Board adopt the revised Policy and Regulation 2127.060, Psychologist. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton  Against: McNally, Loring-Kuhanga, Nohr
  • Board delete Policy and Regulation 2127.061. Psychometrician as the position no longer exists. / Carried unanimously.
  • Board support Oak Bay High School and their application to the School Community Connections Program for the Oak Bay High School Community Television Production Teaching Centre. / Carried unanimously.
  •  Board approve for submission to the Ministry of Education the 2012/2013 Five year Capital Plan that includes the three seismic upgrade projects, the mechanical / energy upgrade, the three buildings envelope projects, the two replacement schools and the two school addition projects identified [Quadra and Vic High]. / Carried unanimously.

November 2012 Standing Committees and Board

November 5, 2012 Ed Policy

  • McNally: Board amend 9368 “Procedure”, Article 107.00 to read “Any Trustee may challenge the Chair, according to Robert’s Rules of Order. The Trustee making the Challenge (with a seconder) will be asked by the Chair to state the challenge; debate will occur according to Robert’s Rules of Order; a vote to sustain the Chair [or not] will follow debate. (Bylaw 9368, Article 107.00 does not allow a Trustee who challenges a ruling of the chair to state the challenge. Robert’s Rules 11th Edition addresses this issue: small group rules refers to appeals, and says they are debatable under the regular rules (see page 256). Demeter’s Manual of Parliamentary Law and Procedure states that appeals are debatable, because the reason for the appeal is of importance to the assembly. If the reasons given for the appeal are convincing, the Chair may change the ruling. Individuals attending meetings of publicly elected bodies expect a challenger to be able to explain a challenge and the chair to defend the decision of the chair, referring to policy or procedure. The current process is less than transparent, but Board Bylaws trump Robert’s Rules of Order, which makes for interesting meetings..) / No quorum for Ed Policy meeting; referred to OPPS November 13.
  • Recommended motion presented by Aboriginal Nations Education: Board approve Aboriginal Cultural Connections 12 as a Board / Authority Authorized Course. /  Referred to November 19, 2012 Board meeting.

November 13, 2012 OPPS:

  • Recommendations from the October 17 WiFi Committee meeting came forward:
  1. Board continue to monitor documentation from the Vancouver Island Health Authority, the Provincial Health Officer, Health Canada and the World Health Organization with regard to the use of Wi-Fi in schools. Further, the Wi-Fi Committee recommends that the Board reviews, on an annual basis, those recommendations and receives updates on any changes. The Board will immediately follow guidelines issued by these authorities.
  2. Board develop an application process whereby elementary schools may submit to the Board of Education for approval to implement Wifi in their schools. Ferris: Moved to table both until the VCPAC report is presented. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, McNally, Nohr, Orcherton. Abstained: Loring-Kuhanga.
  • Board remind the Greater Victoria Teachers’ Association and School District staff regarding the current Board direction related to Wi-Fi in elementary schools. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, McNally, Orcherton    Against:Loring-Kuhanga, Nohr
  • McNally: Board amend Bylaw 9368 ”Procedure” Article 107.00 to read: “Any Trustee may challenge the ruling of the Chair, according to Robert’s Rules of Order. The Trustee making the challenge (with a seconder) will be asked by the Chair to state the challenge; debate will occur according to Robert’s Rules of Order; a vote to sustain the chair [or not ] will follow debate. (This motion had been already referred to this OPPS meeting from the October Board meeting, but at this point in the meeting it was moved to refer this motion to the next OPPS / Ed Policy meeting, December 3.) / Carried unanimously.
  • McNally: Board instruct Chair to write a letter to Adrian Dix, Leader of the Provincial NDP, strongly urging him to reconsider his expressed support of funding for private schools.Alpha: moved to Table (should be “Postpone Indefinitely”). / CarriedFor: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McNally (after hearing debate). (McEvoy absent for the last part of the meeting.)  Against: Loring-Kuhanga.

Board meeting Nov 19, 2012

  • Loring-Kuhanga: Made a motion from the floor arising from the Minutes. Denied by Chair: “Business arising doesn’t include motions”. Was told that notice of motion is necessary. Bylaw 9250.2 Notices of Motion: “Notice of motion should be submitted in sufficient time to be included in the regular pack-up distribution”. Of course this is a good idea, whenever possible. But the SD61 Bylaw states “should”, not “must”, and doesn’t prohibit motions from the floor, just says it’s helpful for everybody to get them on the agenda ahead of time if possible. (“You’re a member, you’re at a meeting, and you have an idea for action. All you have to do now is make a motion for the group to decide if it accepts your idea and authorizes the action you propose.” ( p 72, Robert’s Rules For Dummies.) Motions from the floor are not unusual at meetings.  But, never mind Robert’s Rules.)
  •  Board approve Aboriginal Cultural Connections 12 as a Board Authority Authorized Course. / Carried unanimously.
  •  Board remind the Greater Victoria Teachers’ Association and School District staff regarding the current Board direction related to WiFi in elementary schools. McNally moved to amend: Board request that the Greater Victoria Teachers’ Association and School District staff align with the current Board position that apart from George Jay no WiFi be used in K-5 schools. The amendment was not accepted by the Chair as it was ruled to be a substantive change to the original motion. After discussion, the following motion was carried: That the Board [etc] direct the Superintendent to ensure that no new routers be placed in any school until such time as the board has changed its present direction. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, Nohr, Orcherton   Against: Loring-Kuhanga, McNally
  • Nohr: Board provide the new Minister of Education with an advocacy letter requesting new targeted funding for students in grades K-3 who present with significant learning or behavioural challenges, before they become a priority for psycho-educational assessment and Individual Education Plan support. Additionally, this letter be sent to the Leader of the Opposition, Adrian Dix, and to the Education critic, Robin Austin. / Carried. For: Alpha, Horsman, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr Against: Ferris, Leonard, Orcherton
  • Nohr: Board provide the new Minister of Education with an advocacy letter requesting additional funding to be added to existing funding for students with designations on the autism spectrum (ASD) or with intensive behaviour. Additionally, this letter be sent to the Leader of the Opposition, Adrian Dix, and to the Education critic, Robin Austin. / Carried unanimously.
  • Nohr: Board endorse the Community Plan for a Public System of Integrated Early Care and Learning, otherwise known as the $10 Day Child Care Plan. / Referred with unanimous agreement to Education Policy Committee, January 7, 2013.
  • Nohr: Board encourage awareness of the $10 / Day Child Care Plan to our partner groups and request that they endorse the program as well. / Referred with unanimous agreement to Education Policy Committee, January 7, 2013.
  • Nohr: Board provide the new Minister of Education with an advocacy letter requesting the reinstatement of full targeted funding for students with learning disabilities designations in addition to current funding. Additionally, this letter be sent to the Leader of the Opposition, Adrian Dix, and to the Education critic, Robin Austin. / Defeated. For: Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr Against: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, Orcherton
  • Nohr:Board add Stewardship Report to part 12 of Bylaw 9360, “General Meeting of the Board”, to read: The Order of Business on the SD61 Board of Education Board meeting Agenda shall be:1. Approval of the Agenda 2. Approval of the Minutes 3. Business Arising From the Minutes 4. Unfinished Business 5. Student Achievement 6. District Presentations 7. Public Disclosure of In-Camera Items 8. Community/Public Presentations  9. Trustees’ Reports / Reports From Trustee Representatives 9.1 Chair’s Report 10.Board Committee Reports 10.1 Education Policy Development Committee a. Minutes b. Recommended motions 10.2 Operations Policy and Planning Committee a. Minutes b. Recommended motions 11. District Senior Administration Reports 11.1 Superintendent’s Report 11.2 Secretary-Treasurer’s Report 12. New Business/Notice of Motions / Stewardship Report 13. Adjournment   / (This motion reflects changes to the agenda proposed by McNally and defeated on September 10, 2012 and adds the Stewardship Report. This is different from the agenda as it stands in the current Board Bylaw 9360 General Meeting of the Board. Thus, there were too many changes in one motion.) / Referred to the Operations Planning and Policy meeting, December 3.

December 2012 Standing Committees and Board

December 3, 2012 OPPS / Ed Policy Combined

  • McNally: Board amend Bylaw 9368 “Procedure of Board Meetings”, Article 107.00 to read: “Any Trustee may challenge the ruling of the Chair, according to Robert’s Rules of Order.The Trustee making the challenge (with a seconder) will be asked by the Chair to state the challenge; debate will occur according to Robert’s Rules of Order; a vote to sustain the Chair will follow debate. (At present Article 107.00 states: Any trustee may challenge the ruling of the Chairman, which challenge shall be put to an immediate vote, without debate.) Highlights of debate: Orcherton against. At one point Orcherton said a ruling by the chair was a “teaching moment”. Horsman against: Said BC School Trustees’ Association “uses a parliamentarian” and that the SD 61 Board’s Secretary-Treasurer, referred to by Horsman as a “parliamentarian”,  “keeps up “ on Robert’s Rules and challenging a ruling of the chair is “not constructive”; the secretary-treasurer is the designated authority on rulings made by the Chair. Alpha for: It is not about the Chair, but is about the challenger, who has to clearly explain the challenge. The “parliamentarian” can make a more accurate judgment if he or she knows what the challenge is based on. Loring-Kuhanga for: Current practice is inconsistent. A challenge isn’t always referred to the secretary-treasurer, and there appear to be different “rules” for different people. Orcherton on a “point of clarification” (which doesn’t exist in Robert’s Rules): There is consistency. If the chair is confident in the ruling there is no need to ask the “parliamentarian” (an actual Parliamentarian is a designation conferred only after an involved course of study). (This implies there is no possibility for confident people to be wrong. Interesting thought.) Nohr for: Not easy for the public to follow debate and the clarity provided by the motion would be helpful for everyone. Orcherton Bylaw 9360 is about the order of our business and supersedes Robert’s Rules. The Bylaw doesn’t preclude debate [it does], but just says the challenge goes directly to a vote [that statement precludes debate] , and that it is the Chair’s responsibility to run the meeting.  / Defeated. Against: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, Orcherton.  For: Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr. Absent: McEvoy
  • Nohr:(referred to this meeting from the Board meeting November 19, 2012 ):Board develop and implement a stewardship report for all Board meetings to include the action taken on motions carried, person responsible and progress report (which may include timeline and /or date of progress report). Horsman moved to table the motion along with Motion 3 below (meaning the motions could go away indefinitely if no one moves to “lift from the table” at the next meeting), as there is a motion on the agenda to review Bylaw 9368 “Procedure of Board Meetings”. / Motion to table carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, Nohr, Orcherton.   Against: Loring-Kuhanga, McNally.   Absent: McEvoy.
  • Nohr: Moved: to refer Motion #3 to the Committee below, assuming formation of the committee. / Carried unanimously (although the motion had just been tabled).
  • Horsman: Board form an Ad Hoc Committee to review Bylaw 9360 to make recommendations for enhancements for public engagement including a structure for a possible Question and Answer period. The Ad Hoc Committee will include one representative from the Allied Specialists Association, CUPE 382, CUPE 947, Exempt, GVTA, VCPAC, Victoria Principals and Vice Principals Association [no local website] , and the Superintendent of Schools. The committee will report to the Operations Policy and Planning Committee and will be at no cost to the Board. (“No cost to the Board” means “no release time for union employees”. Trustees are not included  on this committee.) McNally: motion to amend Horsman’s motion: Board form an Ad Hoc Committee to review Bylaw 9360 to make recommendations for increasing opportunities for public input at Board meetings, including at least one, and possibly two, Question and Answer periods for the public. The Ad Hoc Committee will include all interested Trustees, with written input from any partner group or individual that wishes to submit a statement. The Committee will report to the Operations Policy and Planning Committee with a recommendation no later than February 2013. The Committee will meet at no cost to the Board. (After discussion I voted against my own amendment (it was defeated unanimously), as comment from the VCCPAC president regarding the undesirability of exclusion of partner groups except for written submissions was a good point, and caused me to rethink. VCCPAC: VCPAC provided a letter to the Board in 2006 suggesting a question period. The amendment requiring a written submission is less engaging than meeting face to face.)  Amendment defeated unanimously. Back to Horsman’s main motion.Horsman commented that the committee will also consider public taping of the meetings and should permission be granted for that. It will look at any gaps in communication. / Carried. For: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McNally, Nohr, Orcherton      Against: Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga    Absent: McEvoy [I regret my vote on this motion. At the time it seemed better to go ahead with some examination of Bylaw 9360 than have none.]
  • The Chair gave direction to the Superintendent to ensure that motions 3 and 5 from Nohr be referred to the Ad Hoc Committee. Motion #2, Stewardship Report, has been referred to this Ad Hoc Committee.
  • Loring-Kuhanga: Public board meeting include a standing item for one Question and Answer period to allow for questions from the public. / Referred by the Chair, with no motion or vote, to the Ad Hoc Committee. (Robert’s Rules state (Commit or Refer, pp 170-171, Robert’s Rules of Order, 11th Edition) that a motion to refer must be stated as a motion. must be seconded, is debatable, and requires a majority vote.)
  • Revision (attached to agenda, pp 8-32) to Policy and Regulation 5140.1 Child Abuse : brought forward by senior administration (District Principal, Learning Initiatives. Several problems were noted with the presented revision of the Regulation associated with the Policy. / Policy Revision carried. For (Policy revision only): Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, Nohr, Orcherton   Against: Loring-Kuhanga, McNally   Absent: McEvoy   The Regulation was sent back to senior administration for further work.

December 10, 2012: Board meeting

Elections for 2013
a) Chair): Nominated: Horsman, Orcherton. Horsman declined. Orcherton acclaimed.
b) Vice-Chair (2012: Horsman) Nominated: Horsman, Nohr. Elected: Horsman.
c) British Columbia Public Schools Employers’ Association Representative: (2012: McNally) Nominated: McNally, Ferris. Elected: Ferris.
d) BC School Trustees Association Provincial Councillor (2012: Horsman) Nominated: Horsman, Nohr. Elected: Horsman.
e) Vancouver Island Labour Relations Association Representative (no website, no online record): (2012 Ferris) Nominated Ferris, Nohr. elected: Ferris.f) Appointment of Operations Policy and Planning Standing Committee Members (appointed by Board Chair); Election of Chair by Committee members: Members same as 2012: Leonard, Ferris, McNally, Nohr. Chair: Leonard acclaimed as Chair.
g) Appointment of Education Policy Development Committee members [by Board Chair] , Election of Chair: Members same as 2012: Alpha, Horsman, Loring-Kuhanga, McEvoy. Chair: Alpha acclaimed.

  • Assignments of Trustee Liaisons to School Groups (aka “School Families”): same as 2012: Spectrum Community, Alpha / Loring-Kuhanga; Mount Douglas Secondary, Nohr; Lambrick Park Secondary, Orcherton; Victoria High, Ferris; Oak Bay High, McEvoy;Reynolds Secondary, Horsman; Esquimalt High, McNally/Leonard. (Trustees don’t actually get involved with any substantive issues at schools.Bylaw and Policy state that all such matters are to be referrred to senior administration. The pleasant assignments seem to consist of going to arts events,  attending PAC meetings on occasion, and giving grad speeches, a pleasure, when invited. Even the BCSTA “Learning” module says Trustees should visit “their” schools at least once a year – once a year – and talk to parents, staff and students. That should give a complete understanding of the scope of school based issues…)
  • Assignments to other “Ad Hoc Committees”: Most of these committees are not Ad Hoc Committees according to Board Policy, or Board-Municipality Liaisons according to Board Policy, or “Community Advisory Committees” either, according to board Policy, but Community Liaison Positions. There appears to be no related Policy. The Swan Lake / Christmas Hill Nature Sanctuary is still on the list, though the management indicated in discussion that they have no need for a School Board liaison.
  • Board form an Ad Hoc Committee to review Bylaw 9360 to make recommendations for enhancements for public engagement including a structure for a possible Question and Answer period. The Ad Hoc Committee will include one representative from ASA, CUPE 382, CUPE 947, Exempt, GVTA, VPVA, and the Superintendent of Schools. The committee will report to the Operations Policy and Planning Committee and will be at no cost to the Board. McNally: motion to amend: Add “any interested trustees as observers, and two members of the public”. / Defeated. Against: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, Orcherton  For : Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr   Abstained: McEvoy  Amendment #2:  Add “two members of the public”. / Carried. Against: Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr (no trustees on the committee) For: Alpha, Ferris, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton   Abstained: Horsman Vote on the main motion, as amended. / Carried. For: Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton    Against: Alpha, Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr
  • Brought by senior administration as a Policy Review: Board adopt the revised Policy 5140.1 Child Abuse. /  Referred  to the next OPPS meeting January 14 for discussion of the revision of the Regulation. (Each Policy is closely tied to the accompanying Regulation.) The revision of the Regulation was previously found to be problematic at the December 3 combined Ed Policy / OPPS meeting, was discussed at length there, and was not accepted.
  • Trustee Remuneration: The last raise for Trustees in SD61 was in 2008. Ferris / Horsman moved  to table the discussion / motion.  (A motion to table is not debatable. This could be why they’re so popular.). / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, McEvoy, Orcherton. Against: Loring-Kuhanga, McNally, Nohr
  • McNally:Board amend Bylaw 9368 “Procedure” to read : “any trustee may challenge the ruing of the Chair, according to Robert’s Rules of Order. The Trustee making the challenge (with a seconder) will be asked by the Chair to state the challenge; debate will occur according to Robert’s Rules of Order; a vote to sustain the Chair [or not] will follow debate. Horsman moved to amend: Remove the part about debate. / Amendment carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, Loring-Kuhanga, McEvoy, Nohr, Orcherton  Against: McNally  Back to main motion as amended: Board amend Bylaw 9368 “Procedure” to read : “any trustee may challenge the ruing of the Chair, according to Robert’s Rules of Order. The Trustee making the challenge (with a seconder) will be asked by the Chair to state the challenge; a vote to sustain the Chair [or not] will follow. / Carried. For: Alpha, Ferris, Horsman, Leonard, Loring-Kuhanga, McEvoy, Nohr, Orcherton  Against: McNally  As required by  Bylaw 9010, a the 3 readings needed for a Bylaw change  took place.