Jump to content

      



























Photo

Schoolboard trustee meetings 2009 / 2010: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly


  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1 think local

think local
  • Member
  • 54 posts

Posted 14 September 2010 - 09:24 AM

Sunday, September 12, 2010
School Board Trustee Meetings 2009/2010: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

VPEC's goals include:
Advance Community and Staff Involvement in District Decision-Making by working to:

* Open all School Board meetings to the public
* Create a public record of Trustee votes at School Board meetings
* Provide regular reporting of Board meetings to the community

From September 2009 to June 2010, VPEC members Annie McKitrick and Linda Travers attended and recorded what happened at the three monthly public meetings of SD61’s Board of Trustees – Education Policy Committee meeting, Operations, Policy and Planning meeting and the Board of Education meeting.
Their focus was the level of open and transparent governance by the nine elected trustees.

The following summary documents the Good, the Bad and the Ugly:

the Good


* Agendas with attached details for Board of Education meetings and the Education Policy & Operations and Policy Planning Committee meetings are now posted on SD61 website by the Friday before the Monday meetings.
* media releases are posted on the SD61 website
* names of public attending the Education Policy Committee meetings are recorded in the minutes and no meetings 2007 -2010 were cancelled
* more adherence to the Agenda e.g. reporting out of In Camera items

the Bad and the Ugly

* the Chair asks only for those ‘in favor’ of a motion. Often the public cannot see more than 4 hands go up and yet the motion is approved without the Chair asking ‘those opposed’ to the motion.
* in 2007-2008 2 Operations, Policy & Committee meetings were cancelled with 5 cancelled in 2008-2009 and in 2009-2010 3 meetings were cancelled. Cancellations are unfortunate as it is only at the Committee meetings that the public can receive answers to questions and concerns. The answer that there are no Agenda items is unsatisfactory. Perhaps if the public had heard about K registration after it was done in Feb., action could have been discussed before the budget was passed.
* names of public attending the Operations, Policy Planning meetings are not recorded.
* while it’s good that questioning and discussion is allowed at the Education Policy and Operations, Policy and Planning Committees, often the topic is left unresolved as the Chair does not outline what action is to follow.
* the writing of Motions by trustees. They should be using a Whereas/Be it Resolved format so everyone understands the reason for the issue (e.g. Whereas experienced SD61 Early Childhood educators have expressed concerns with the full day K/1 split and whereas the focus of the K curriculum is play and whereas the Gr. 1 focus is academic skills and whereas 4 yr. old K students need constant access to an adult to provide a sound educational beginning to school I move that at a minimum an Education Assistant be assigned to such classes for at least 2 ½ hours per day.
* often trustees requests for reporting back to a Board of Education meeting on an item don’t happen. E.g. Jan. 4 Education Policy Comm. meeting, Trustee Orcherton asked for an report by administration as to the costs in time and money of having all teachers involved in differentiated learning. She also wanted the pros/cons of providing the true costs of a good education.
* the trustees don’t know their own Policies, Regulations and Bylaws – Naming school sites Bylaw 9210 says rationale must be attached. The updating of Policy/Regulation 1421 in Feb. did not include the rationale or the old Policy for comparison.
* the Mar. 24 Special Budget meeting did not allow the trustees to ask questions, make comments or debate the Sect’y –Treas. on his Power Point presentation. It was to be posted on the SD61 website following the meeting.
* at the Mar. 31 Special Budget meeting 8 members of the public made presentations but again there were no comments or questions or discussion by the trustees
* at the Apr. 7 Special Budget meeting the trustees and administration staff were at different tables and the public chose where to sit. No trustee had a copy of the budget nor were there any for the public to pick up. There was no reporting out of information from each table.
* all three readings to pass the 2010-2011 Budget were passed within 48 hours so no time was allowed to question or debate items line by line.
* at the May 17, 2010 Bd. Ed. meeting the motion for Elementary & Middle schools to have a balanced weekly timetable (thus no 2 p.m. dismissal times on Wed) was passed. Again, no administrator or trustee had carefully read Regulation 6112.1 written in Oct. 1981 and revised in Feb. 1986.. If they had, the bottom line would have told them that ”the principal submits the plan for a change of school hours to the appropriate ZONE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT. The plan will be submitted, through District leadership Team & the Education Policy Development Committee to the Board for INFORMATION.” So, the motion should have been ruled out of order.
* how the trustees earn their over $17,000 yearly salary is unknown as the trustees don’t give a monthly report.



http://www.vpec.org/...s-20092010.html

 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users