Meeting Agenda Items 1-5
In Camera meeting before the public meeting: 6:30 – 7:30.
Operations Policy and Planning Committee: Chair Leonard Absent: McEvoy
Bylaw 9130.2 OPPS states: “The Operations Policy and Planning Committee shall meet … for the purpose of developing for Board consideration major impact areas related to: a) all personnel matters; b) all financial and legal matters; c) all matters related to the facilities required to provide educational programs; d) information technology and planning matters.”
1. Approval of Agenda: Approved / Adopted.
2. Approval of Minutes: (Official minutes on SD61 website)
A. Minutes of Combined Ed Policy / OPPs June 10, 2013: Approved
B. Minutes of Combined Ed Policy / OPPs September 9, 2013: Approved
3. Business Arising Out of the Minutes: None.
4. Presentations: None
5. Superintendent’s Report
A. Subcommittee on Public Engagement
- Former SSD61 Trustee Donna Jones, invited by the Board Chair to represent “the public” on the Committee for its duration, was at the Board table.
- By the end of a long and interesting discussion, some sections in the draft version of the changes proposed to Bylaw 9360 (beginning on page 16 of the meeting agenda packup) were unanimously agreed on: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (3 speakers per issue needs further discussion; the maximum number of speakers was extended to six, with the Chair having discretion to extend that number; time limit for question period and total public time on hold for further discussion), 6 (with the previous bullet point (page 17) incorporated with slightly different wording after discussion – “informed of” rather than ‘directed to”), 7, 8, 9, 10, and 12.
- Much of Section 11 (the proposed new Agenda[see #4 in New Business September 2012, Lined Paper] format, and associated practices to be part of the Bylaw, in italics below), was agreeable to all, as were Sections 12 and 13. Acknowledgement of Aboriginal Territory will be added at the beginning (already a practise).
11 The Agenda shall contain the following:
A. Approval of the Agenda; Approval of Previous Minutes and Business Arising from the Minutes
Student Achievement Presentations; District Presentations; Community Presentations
B.Chair’s Report; Trustee Reports (including Reports from Trustee Representatives withOther Public Bodies)
C.Board Committee Reports:
(1)Education Policy Development Motions
(2)Operations Policy and Planning Motions
D.District Leadership Team Reports
F.Public Disclosure of In-Camera Items
G.New Business/Notice of Motions
The order of the Agenda shall be as above, unless varied at the meeting by majority vote.
Discussion included the following points:
- McNally: Community Presentations stipulations are too restrictive.
- Lorng-Kuhanga: Move Question period and Public Disclosure of In Camera items further up on the agenda.
- Alpha Allow six speakers, without specifying only two speakers per issue. Limiting what we re willing to hear is too tight a format.
- Orcherton: Where will be put Disclosure, then? What is “not important” and can be moved down?
- Ferris: Suggests “the number of community presentations may be extended at the discretion of the Chair“.
- Nohr: One question period of ten minutes after “Student Achievement”, and one more for ten minutes at F. that creates an additional 5 minutes for questions. Move Disclosure to after the Chair’s Report.
- Horsman: Keep the half hour for public presentations and add 15 minutes for question period. Be sure people know about the Standing Committees and opportunities to ask questions there, as per point 6.
- Alpha: In favour of two question periods.
- Leonard: Need to limit the number of speakers on a topic in some way. Have one question period. Disclosure of In Camera Items used to be at H on the agenda so it has been moved up.
The Deputy Superintendent (who chaired the SubCommittee) will prepare a new draft document of this portion of the Report, reflecting what has been agreed on and what still needs discussion. This Report will continue to be worked on at subsequent OPPs meetings.
This discussion was what I’d consider to be very close to “policy development”. All that’s missing was active Trustee involvement at the generative stage, which I consider to be vital work of a Trustee. However, that view is not shared by a majority.