Robert’s Rules of Order 11th Edition: Debate on the Question p 42 / p 43: “Speakers must address their remarks to the Chair. Debate must be confined to the merits of the pending question. ..and…should avoid injecting a personal tone into debate. …they must never attack or make any allusion to the motives of members.” // p 392: “The measure, not the member, is the subject of debate.”
SD61 Board Bylaw 9368 Procedure
“104.02 Trustees shall be permitted to debate only upon a motion, as herein provided, and each trustee shall be limited to the opportunity to speak once to any motion,…
Trustees and student representatives are referred to by last name only for brevity; “The Board of Education of SD No. 61 (Greater Victoria)” is referred to as “the Board”. No audio or video recordings are made of Standing Committee meetings, only of Board meetings. Motions may be shortened but retain essential wording. Seconders not noted.
Legally required reports posted beside relevant meeting. (Click “view all” on Bylaws, Policies and Regs menu. under “Board” on SD61 website). “Section 72” refers to Section 72 (3) BC School Act : “ A board must prepare a record containing a general statement as to the nature of the matters discussed and the general nature of the decisions reached at a meeting from which persons other than trustees or officers of the board, or both, were excluded…”. SD61 Bylaw 9360.1: “In-camera items that may be discussed confidentially include legal, property, personnel and privacy matters as defined by provincial legislation. Full board meetings must be held in public unless the board decides that it is in the public’s interest to hold a private session (closed or in-camera meeting). However, it is important not to abuse this power. Potential controversy or embarrassment to the board is not usually sufficient reasons for an in-camera meeting.” Any report beyond the very basic one required must be done by in camera motion / majority vote.
Full agenda with attachments here.
Preceded by In Camera meeting at 6:00 pm.
Ed Policy / OPPS Combined Meeting December 7, 2015
Chairs Nohr / Leonard
Student Representative: Jonah Van Driesum, Oak Bay High School
Regrets: Loring-Kuhanga, Whiteaker
- Approval of Agenda: Adopted – move D.1 to just after B.1. Approved.
- Approval of Minutes:
A. Ed Policy Nov 2/15: Approved. Lined Paper report here.
B. OPPS Nov 9/15 : Approved. Lined Paper notes here.
- Business Arising from Minutes: None
- Education Policy Development Committee
A. Regulation 3545.2, Field Trips : Associate Superintendent Whitten (Pp 9-34 agenda packup – full packup on SD61 website ) [Proposed changes to walkabout staffing-student ratios, and field trip forms including a change intended to address needs of trans students on overnight trips: “Students will not go into sleeping quarters that they are not assigned to without the specific approval of the supervising teacher.”]
- Audrey Smith (VCPAC President) : Board talks about engaging parents but hasn’t on this Regulation – this is the perfect opportunity as there are significant changes.
- Paynter: On P. 14 agenda, re Education Assistants possibly being reassigned, teacher and principal may agree, but EA should agree too.
In regard to the “sleeping quarters” change in Field Trip Code of Conduct:
- Orcherton: Need a stakeholder review. Incident of the ” feminism class” at Vic High recently.
- Solomon Lindsay, student Vic High (in the public seats): The Vic High issue was straightforward; was a gender studies class. A discussion was needed to get some clarity around what was being discussed re “feminism”; the media was there for a visit and this became something that the media blew up. It wasn’t a big issue at the school.
- Leonard: If this is sent out without stakeholder review, there will be comment back to the Board and it will have to be revised then, so send it out for review now.
- McNally: Development of Regulations was given to senior administration by a previous iteration of the Board. If the Board is changing Regulations and co-developing them we need to change the Policy about that. Article 3 in Bylaw 9220 addresses this issue. Don’t see the “major changes” here; the teacher would have done a lot of pre-education with parents and students and work with families before this aspect of a field trip were to be in effect. This is a social justice and human rights issue, not something for “debate”.
- Watters: This came forward in March so has had much scrutiny already.
Orcherton: That the Board direct the Superintendent to to send out to all school principals and all stakeholders for feedback on proposed changes to #10, with feedback to come to Ed Policy in the spring. / Carried after debate below. For: Leonard, Nohr, Paynter, Orcherton Against: McNally, Watters
- Orcherton: We want all to feel safe. We need to safeguard minority rights. There might be religious objections. We don’t want students to g feel further bullied and victimized. Might be resistance – we need to educate to tolerate. Prefer acceptance though. We can’t dictate to the non-included group and do this by fiat.
- McNally: The words “Selma Alabama” came into my mind. There were severe objections to kids with brown skin going to school with kids with white skin. If opinion, not social justice and human rights, had prevailed, integration of schools would not have occurred. It was done by fiat and overcame the objections of bigots. I see similarities with this issue.
- Smith: This directly affects children so to VCPAC it is significant. We will take it to the VCPAC Executive and meeting, and may have to send it out to all PACs for review.
- Van Driesum: McNally’s point well taken, but without consultation could make the situation worse; believe trans friends woudl agree.
- Superintendent: Once a Policy is adopted the Regulation enacts that.
- Orcherton: The Board always has the final say. [Some individuals’ recall of debate on Regulations presented by senior administration, especially regarding objections by some Trustees in the past term re deletions of references to a strategic plan, might think otherwise.]
- Paynter: Bylaw 9210
- McNally: 9210 is irrelevant to this discussion ad the motion is possibly out of order in regard to this Regulation.
- Leonard: There was a misstep in not doing the consultation before presenting this to the Board. The consultation step was missed. Hoping this motion will send this out and correct that.
- Nohr: As Chair am ruling this motion to be in order . A step was missed on the consultation process and the Board has had a request from VCPAC.
- Watters: Where is the missed step articulated in the development of a Regulation?
- Smith: A phone call to VCPAC to see if it is something that parents want to discuss.
- Orcherton: Student reps could put this out to students, and principals could put it on PAC bulletin Boards in schools. All we heard from is the GSA Club.
- Van Driesum: Could talk to LGBTQ group [this recommendation to senior admin for Regulation change came from there] , maybe Superintendent Town Hall. Could send to parents and ask for student response.
- Watters: This is not “correcting a misstep”. This is broad consultation on a Regulation.
- David Futter, GVTA: Policy and Regulation 1163 says the District will consult “If and when a decision may be controversial”. Clearly, this is, and is value based. And the GVTA may have opinions on the changes to supervision levels. The GVTA has been affected by Regulations that did not have GVTA input.
- Paynter: Recall as a parent [pre-election November 2014] being told Regulations were not subject to consultation. Need input from Superintendent and senior leadership re what consultation will look like not based on a one-off . Need to have it built in as intermediary step?
- Superintendent: Can take it to broader consultation. Bylaw 9201 Development of Policy applies, as does Bylaw 9220 Administrative Regulations.
- Leonard: Many Regulation changes had to do with internal operations of the Board. See page 35 of this packup – that’s the missed step.
- Watters: Apparent that this will come back to the Board if don’t do the consulting now.
- Orcherton: This will come back to Ed Policy perhaps in March.
Paynter: Motion to table the motion.[Withdrawn. Back to Orcherton’s motion to send out for broad consultation.]
B. Concussion Regulation Update : Associate Superintendent Whitten (P 35 agenda packup): Information: Draft Regulation to go to Concussion Committee before presentation to Ed Policy.
C. Update on Syrian Refugees: Deputy Superintendent Shelley Green (Pp 35-58 agenda packup)
- Orcherton: Middle schools have room. Schools are pretty full.
- Deputy Superintendent: Yes, they are. Unlikely that schools near UVic can take any. Considering close to mosques, school capacity, housing.
- Superintendent: Ministry is expecting 800-1100 school age students in the whole province.
Orcherton left the meeting. Not assigned to OPPS.
Chair Leonard; McNally, Paynter, Whiteaker (ex officio Loring-Kuhanga – vote but not counted for quorum) [Present: Leonard, McNally, Paynter = quorum.]
5. Operations Policy and Planning Committee
A. Presentations: None
B. Finance and Legal Affairs
1. Cloverdale Capital Project Bylaw : Secretary-Treasurer (Pp 59074 agenda packup) : Construct Student Drop-off Area. / Bylaw for expenditure: Carried. Unanimous.
- McNally: Note reference to “her Majesty the Queen”. Never noticed before on these forms. Unusual? Also how many projects did SD61 aply for?
- Secretary-Treasurer: How the form from the Ministry came for this. SD61 applied for several; this was the only one approved.
- Paynter: Monthly construction reports should come to the Board (p 70).
- McNally: No, we don’t need to have oversight of monthly progress reports. Facilities is tasked wit following through on the project on budget and we don’t need to micromanage that as a Board. Also, these monthly reports are is a new requirement from the Ministry and is an additional burden on Facilities and an outrageous amount of reporting required for very small amount of money from the Ministry. If Paynter would like these to come to the Board, need to make a motion to that effect.[No motion; went to vote.]
2. Bylaw 9360 General Meeting of the Board : Secretary-Treasurer (Pp 75-79 agenda packup): e-communication, e- and Skype attendance at meetings (p 79), and McNally motion re timing of Board elections (p 76) [not civic election]. / Carried. Unanimous.
- Smith: “Outsiders” don’t want matters moved forward because it’ not apparent to all what the reasoning was.
- Leonard: Trustees’ opinions will influence others’ opinions.
- McNally: Ombudsperson’s report 2012 Best Practices for Open Meetings is helpful. Even though School Boards not governed by Community Charter as civic governments are, the principles are sound, and definitions helpful.
3.Ad Hoc Board Standing Committee Review Committee Report:
a. Ad Hoc Board Standing Committee Review : Secretary-Treasurer (Pp80-89): 3 recommendations: 1. Rename Education Policy and development Committee to “Education Policy and Directions Committee” 2. No change to Operations Policy and Planning Committee 3. Establish a new standing Policy Committee.
b. Bylaw 9360.2 Meetings of the Standing Committees: Clean up antiquated never followed agenda for OPPS in the Bylaw, and establish a standard agenda for Ed Policy and Directions [my paraphrasing] / Carried. Unanimous.
c. Bylaw 99130.1 Education Policy and Directions Committee: Update the responsibilities of the Ed Policy and Directions Committee (p 86) / Carried. Unanimous.
d. Bylaw 9130.2 Operations Planning and Policy Committee: “Housekeeping” wording changes. / Carried. Unanimous.
e. Bylaw 9130.3 Policy Committee: Establish a Standing Committee to review Policy [very much needed in SD61 [would give consistent approach rather than one-off “fixes” which is what has been happening – good intentions but a bit chaotic] – 2 trustees appointed by Chair, plus Superintendent and any other staf as required by the Committee, to meet as required and report to Ed policy and Directions / OPPS. / Carried. For: Leonard, McNally, Nohr, Watters Against: Paynter
- Watters: Amendment: Add 4. e To consult as per Policy and Regulation 1163 Consultation. / Taken as direction to the Committee as Committee must to bring every proposal to Ed Policy and Directions and OPPS as per Article 5 in this proposed Bylaw.
- Paynter: Will send suggestions to Secretary-Treasurer.
4. Dissolve Ad Hoc Board Standing Committee Review Committee : Secretary-Treasurer (P 90) / Carried. Unanimous.
6. Public Disclosure of In Camera Items [Listed as “C” under OPPS”; should be 6 as applies to entire agenda, not just OPPS]: None.
7. New Business [Listed as “D” under OPPS; see above]
1 McNally: [Was moved up to after the Cloverdale Bylaw] That the Board amend Bylaw 9360 General Meeting of the Board to add: “Each year thereafter during the term of office, the election of Chair, Vice-Chair, and Board representatives to varus agencies where the trustees hae regular representation and the appointment of Trustees to internal and external committees shall take place at the June Board meeting” at the end of Article 2. / Carried. Unanimous.
2 Paynter: That the Board participate in the Township of Esquimalt’s review of its official community plan. / Carried. For: Leonard, Nohr, Paynter, Watters Against: McNally [on incorrect premise – that the Township had not invited this participation when in fact, it had, in an email to all Trustees]
3 Watters: That the Board direct the Chair to write a letter to the Minister of Finance, copying the Minister of Education, requesting that the Minister of Finance heed the recommendations from the First Report of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services and increase the funding to K-12 education in the 2016 budget. / Carried. Unanimous.
- Watters: This does not include returning funding to adult education, also an issue, but is additional to Learning Improvement Fund / Education Fund shortfalls being addressed by the Board’s Needs Budget Committee. Would like to see the Board indicate co-signing with the select Standing Committee Finance as SD61 did not participate as a Board.
8. Notices of Motion [Listed as 6 on agenda]
Nohr: That the board immediately terminate the Technology Ad Hoc Committee [TOR debate at C.2 b iv June 15/15 Board meeting] and bring forward a new motion with a revised TOR that incudes revised process re parent selection at elementary, middle and high schools.
9.General Announcements [Listed as 7]: None
10. Adjournment [Listed as 8]: Approximately 10 pm.