Victoria Public Education Coalition

School board votes should be recorded

2012-02-19T09:46:00.000-08:00

Mike Eso has a great Letter to the Editor in today's Times Colonist:

When will our local elected representatives understand that recorded votes are an important cornerstone on our democracy and are vital in making these institutions more transparent and accountable to the public?

Newly elected Greater Victoria School Board trustees Diane McNally and Deborah Nohr should be congratulated for pushing to ensure board minutes reflect the voting records of individual trustees. The trustees who voted against this suggestion should be ashamed of themselves.

Click here to read the full letter.

January report from Trustee Nohr

2012-02-13T23:07:00.000-08:00

Here is an update from Trustee Deborah Nohr:

First Priority Always……. Advocacy for the Children

A New Trustee’s Point of View January, 2012

Greater Victoria School District 61

Report #2

This month I have had a wonderful opportunity to meet many parents at their children’s schools, at Board meetings, at VCPAC meetings and in the community. I have also corresponded with several parents through e-mails. I appreciate your time, your insights and your desire to have the most positive and successful experience for your children and all other children in our district. I look forward to working with you. Together, we may acknowledge and enjoy our many successes, strive to improve our children’s school experience and address issues through our joint efforts.

And the good news is……

On the Ground and at the Schools

I had been assigned to the Mount Doug family of schools and that means that I will be more closely connected to the students, parents, teachers, administration and community in this area of our school district. I have been warmly received and provided with excellent information about each of the four schools: Mount Douglas High School, Arbutus Middle School, Frank Hobbs Elementary School and Campus View Elementary School. I am pleased to say that the teachers are doing a wonderful job of providing a meaningful and engaging curricula and learning experience for their students. This could not be done of course without the support of the educational assistants, specialty teachers, administration and parents. I am so pleased to consistently observe kind and respectful relationships between teachers and students. This type of relationship has far reaching benefits for our children. I have also attended the PAC meetings at Eagle View Elementary and Sir James Douglas Elementary. There is no better way to stay connected with parents, appreciate all their work and effort and understand their goals than by attending these meetings at the school level. Thank you for your generous invitations. I may see you at your PAC meeting; Frank Hobbs and Willows are scheduled for February.

At the Board Table

The Chairman of the Board, Peg Orcherton, arranged with our senior administration to provide two full days of in-service covering funding details and the roles and responsibilities of each department. The experience was very helpful and it provided a tremendous overview and update for all trustees.

At the January Educational Policy Meeting, students from every high school along with their principals shared their personal experiences about having greater choice, flexibility and personalized learning to meet their needs and be successful both personally and academically. If you want more detail go to sd61.bc.ca and look under Board for the January, 2012 Board minutes. There you will see the names of the schools and all the students and their specific programmes. Each student had a different story to tell. The good news is these student were feeling a sense of engagement and success. We want this for all students.

1) I presented a motion to re-establish dialogue and local bargaining with our teachers. The motion was carried. It is so important that we have an on-going and respectful dialogue with our teachers.

2) Catherine Alpha presented a motion to initiate a more in-depth community consultation process to develop the 2012-2013 budget. The motion was carried.

3) Bev Horsman presented a motion to refuse any raise in the basic trustee remuneration rate for the 2011- 2012 school year. The motion carried unanimously.

At Our Schools

All of the high schools had Open Houses during the month of January. I was able to attend the Open House at Mount Doug and Oak Bay and I was pleased to see so many student leaders guiding prospective students and their parents through the building and informing them about the many programs.

Budget Time

Our first public input meeting for building the budget will be held at SJ Willis in the auditorium on February 1 at 7pm. We are encouraging parents, teachers, CUPE workers, community members and administration to come and provide us with their experiences where adequate funding is supporting learning and where underfunding is the basis for their concern.

Stay tuned from more information…… parent advocacy is vitally important!

A Quick History Lesson

“Despite provincial claims to the contrary, there has been virtually no actual increase to public education funding between 1992 and the current year. In fact, the 1990 operating grant( in 2006 dollars) was over $200 more per pupil than we now receive under current funding levels.

While funding per student ( taking the total funding amount and dividing it by the number of full-time enrolments ) may have increased marginally any rise disappears once inflation ( consumer price index ) is factored in. Apart from our salary costs negotiated and passed on by Victoria but not fully funded- inflation on fuel, supplies and services place vast pressures on school district budgets.

Between 2001-02 and 2009-10 public education funding has increased by 19% while inflation has increased by about 25%. Costs of new initiatives downloaded to the school boards have a devastating impact on funding students in the classroom.

In addition, the services to children triggered by special-needs designations are not fully funded and must be subsidized from our operating grant. All costs related to these additional components of our responsibilities have to be met by reducing services and programs for our children.” * Eden Haythornthwaite, chairperson of the Cowichan Board of Education.

And so we are going to work very hard to develop a ‘needs budget’ reflecting the funding necessary to provide a successful learning experience for all our children. This is the work we will be doing through February, March and April with your help.

Respectfully,

Deborah Nohr SD 61 Trustee

Conversations with Activists

2012-01-28T22:26:00.000-08:00

Here is an event at UVic on January 31st:

A New Trustee’s Point of View

2011-12-31T13:28:00.000-08:00

First Priority Always .… Advocacy for the Children

A New Trustee's Point of View December 31, 2011

Greater Victoria School District 61

Report #1

Once again I would like to take this moment to thank everyone for their support and their vote on November 19, 2011. With 13,445 votes, I feel confident to speak boldly on behalf of our children and work for the goals we see as mutually important.

On December 5, 2011 the Honourable P.M. Hubbard conducted the swearing in ceremony. At that time I swore to uphold the oath of office as trustee in the Greater Victoria School District and I again promise you I will do my very best to represent your voice at the Board table.

So we're off to a grand start!

The former Board of trustees decided to renew the contracts of the superintendent and secretary-treasurer in November rather than allow for input from newly elected trustees. This is the very process that must be changed. It only makes sense that new trustees elected by the community should have input into the goals and objectives for the next three years for the superintendent and secretary-treasurer. In January we will ask for a report on their performance review. It is my expectation that we will be able to provide input.

We have had a very unnecessary struggle to receive a copy of the source budget document which is referred to as the line by line item budget. I ran on a platform of public education… properly funded… properly managed. It is imperative that I be as fully informed as possible and this requires the line by line item budget. Our Board chairperson, Peg Orcherton, has assured me that this information will finally be available on Saturday, January 7, 2012 at our first orientation meeting.

And the good news is…

The district is providing two full days of orientation on Saturday, January 7th and Saturday, January 14^th. This will allow an opportunity to meet many of the senior staff and to be provided with critical documents, policy and regulations, goals and objectives and updated on the current challenges.

Catherine Alpha was elected as chair of the Education Policy Committee. The first order of business is to refine the mandate for the budget sub committee. I will personally be inviting a wide variety of individuals to come and speak about their experiences and provide input as we determine the costs for a properly and fully funded public education system. The first meeting is Monday, January 9 at 7pm and I invite you to attend. I believe it will be held in the Board room at the Tolmie building. Please call 250-475-3212 and ask the receptionist to confirm the location.

I will be attending my first PAC meetings at various schools in our district in January. I will also be visiting schools in my assigned area which includes Mount Douglas HS, Arbutus MS, Campus View and Frank Hobbs elementary schools. I will offer to volunteer in high need classrooms that are seriously affected by underfunding. When I return to the Board table I will describe the experience of the students, educational aids and teachers in these classrooms and I hope to persuade my fellow trustees to bring back some of the $835,000 ( funds not allocated in this school year) to support these students.

Future initiatives include…

We will bring forward a broad range of motions in January 2012 to support greater transparency, improved process and more involvement by all of our partner groups. There will be a systematic review of policy and regulations.

Just a final thought…

While there are many outstanding learning experiences occurring every day for many of our students the other reality is that public education is deteriorating. As I reviewed the Superintendent's Report on Class Size and Composition (Oct. 2011) I was struck with disbelief that this government would support a funding policy that results in serious neglect of many of our children. One teacher stated, " A disproportionate amount of time by the teacher is spent in redirecting students to the task and addressing behaviour. Teachers feel unable to meet all needs effectively." I read this response over and over. A parent on a PAC executive stated, " We expect to have enough support in each class to satisfactorily manage the amount of students with IEPs. The principal has indicated that there are not enough EAs to support these classes for each full day." Why is this situation of neglect and underfunding acceptable? Where is the collective outcry by parents and community? I urge you to send a concise and clear directive to the government of the day expressing your expectation that our tax dollars will be used first for the children in our public education system. Let the Premier and the Minister of Education know that you will not vote for a party that does not put our children first. The government states that the education community is not innovative enough. All of us know, however, that there are not enough teachers, educational assistants, psychologists, speech and language therapists, counsellors, and school librarians. There is a serious disconnect between what the government of the day thinks is important and what we know is vital for our families and communities and the sense of self-worth for our children.

Please send your e-mails to:

premier@gov.bc.ca

minister.educ@gov.bc.ca

Respectfully,
Deborah Nohr

Annual General Meeting

2011-12-07T15:09:00.000-08:00

ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

Celebrate VPEC's Achievements

and

Help Shape New Directions

Saturday, January 14, 2012 ~ 1:30 - 3:30 p.m.

Oaklands Community Centre ~ 2827 Belmont Avenue in Victoria

~ Free parking on the street ~

~ Refreshments will be provided ~

The meeting welcomes members/lapsed members/and anyone else interested in advocating for fully funded public education K - 12.

For more information, contact either:

Starla Anderson at 250-744-2791

Dale Perkins at 250-592-5487

VCPAC All-Candidate's Forum - & Shaw's profile of trustee candidates

2011-11-14T21:52:00.000-08:00

Information found on the Victoria Confederation of Parent Advisory Committee's website: www.vcpac.ca

The Victoria Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils (VCPAC) will be hosting a second All Candidates Meeting for the public. This forum style meetings will allow the candidates to introduce themselves, and answer questions from the audience.

Tuesday, November 15th from 7pmto 9pm at Reynolds Secondary School

***********************************************************************************
Watch school trustee candidates on Shaw TV and learn more about those running in SD61 & SD62 on Shaw - Channel 11.

Tuesday 1pm & 9pm, Tuesday 1pm & 9pm
We'll post further dates as available.

Time for Some Changes - Part 7

2011-11-07T19:46:00.000-08:00

Nov 7, 2011
By Linda Travers

In Part 5 of Time for Some Changes, I suggested it was time to change the culture of the current Board of Education. We have the opportunity to do that with the upcoming election.

For the past 3 years, I’ve attended almost all the Board of Education meetings. My overall impression is that the elected trustees just simply approve what the Secretary-Treasurer and District Superintendent suggest. One must be in attendance at meeting to see how trustees vote. It is almost impossible for a member of the public to track trustees’ voting records. The minutes of the past three years do not show who makes a motion or how individual trustees vote on motions. You’ll find the occasional reference if a trustee has specifically asked for his/her negative vote to be recorded.

I choose to elect trustees who have demonstrated and will encourage decision making in an open, transparent public process that is responsible, good for public education and makes financial sense.

Here is a brief summary of my personal choices for SD 61 trustee candidates:
(Note: VPEC is NOT endorsing candidates)

1. Edith Loring-Kuhanga – as a former trustee in SD63 (Saanich) she brings knowledge and experience in how good decisions are made. Have a look at the information in various sections of the SD63 (Saanich) website http://www.sd63.bc.ca/ compared to the SD61 (Greater Victoria) website http://www.sd61.bc.ca/default.aspx

2. Diane McNally – as a former Reading Recovery teacher, she knows the importance of early intervention for students experiencing difficulty. She understands that a year in the life of a student not receiving appropriate placement is not commitment “to each student’s success in learning within a responsive and safe environment” (SD61 Mission Statement).

3. Deborah Nohr – over the past three years, she has brought teachers and parents to Board meetings to tell trustees about the situations students face in District classrooms. She also brought invitations from ten teachers inviting trustees to visit their classrooms to observe firsthand. No current trustees accepted the invitations.

4. Peg Orcherton – the only incumbent trustee I am voting for. She believes in open, transparent governance. She has tried to get motions on the floor for discussion. The lack of a following of Roberts’ Rules of Order by the Chair has led to confusion. Often neither the trustees nor the public in attendance understand the outcome.

5. Rob Paynter – he correctly pointed out to the current trustees, unhappy with Stantec’s Strategic Facilities report, that one must have a Request for Proposal with checks and balances throughout the process.

It is not necessary to vote for 9 trustees.

The Fernwood Community Association held a Trustee Candidates’ meeting on Nov. 1 providing an opportunity to hear and ask 13 of the 16 candidates about their platforms. It was unfortunate that Trustees Holland, Leonard and Young were not in attendance.

There will be Trustee Candidates’ meetings sponsored by the Victoria Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils.

Wednesday Nov. 9th 7-9 p.m. at Spectrum Community School
Tuesday Nov. 15th 7-9 p.m. at Reynolds Secondary School.

I hope you will be able to attend one of the meetings to help you decide on whom to vote for on Nov. 19.

Time for Some Changes - Part 6

2011-11-01T15:21:00.000-07:00

Nov. 1, 2011
By Linda Travers

Auditor Genera John Doyle wrote in a 2008-2009 report that an effective public participation process is based on principles of transparency and openness.

At a Nov. 8, 2010 Operations, Policy and Planning Committee meeting it was moved and seconded that the Board take a precautionary look to allow the District Health and Safety Committee to review Wi-Fi in SD61. The motion carried. At the Nov. 15, 2010 Board of Education meeting the motion was changed to allow a representative ad hoc committee to review Wi-Fi and report back by the Spring of 2011 at no cost to the Board. The public in attendance at those meeting assumed they could serve on this ad hoc committee. But that was not to be. On Nov. 30, 2010 Sect’y.-Treasurer Ambeault sent out an email to say that trustees Orcherton, Ferris, Pitre, and parent advisory executive member John Bird had met. It had been decided that the WiFi committee would comprise of 2 members from the Parent Advisory Council, 1 member each from CUPE 382 and CUPE 947 who declined participation, 1 member from the GVTA and 1 member from the Allied Specialist’s Assoc., 1 administrator member each representing Secondary, Middle and Elementary schools and the Director of Information Technology. The chair would be Sect’y.-Treas. Ambeault. The purpose of the Committee was to provide a forum for interested parties to make their positions with supporting information known to the committee with 3 meetings (Jan. 24, Jan. 31 and Feb. 28, 2011) between 5:00 and 7:00 p.m. with additional meetings if required.

The last Wi-Fi meeting was Feb. 28, 2011. More Wi-Fi was being installed as the meetings were being held. In the Mar. 4, 2011 Saanich News, Board Chair Trustee Ferris was quoted as saying that SD61 had no plans to remove wireless internet from schools, following the last of 3 WiFi Comm. meetings. He goes on to say that having read the information over the last month-and-a-half I think it’s more a question of deciding what, if any, the discussion points will be and then, out of that, some recommendations might come.

Question: If there were no plans to remove wireless internet from schools as Chair Ferris stated in his Mar. 4 press statement, what was the reason for having a WiFi Committee meet to receive presentations on Jan. 24, 31 and Feb. 28? Why hasn’t a Board of Education June 20, 2011 motion to reconvene the Wi-Fi Committee happened?
It’s obviously time to elect trustees who believe an effective public participation process is based on principles of transparency and openness.

Come Join the Conversation - All Candidate Trustee Forums - Nov 1, 9 & 15

2011-11-01T15:10:00.000-07:00

MEET THE TRUSTEE CANDIDATESŠand be a well-informed voter.

The first All Candidates Meeting is tonight, November 1st, 2011.

Fernwood All Candidates Meeting For School Trustees
Join us at the Fernwood Community Center on Tuesday, Nov.1,2011 at 7:30 pm

The Victoria Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils (VCPAC) will be
hosting two All Candidates Meetings for the public. These forum style
meetings will allow the candidates to introduce themselves, and answer
questions from the audience.(note: there is a correction of venues)Wednesday, November 9th from 7 pm to 9 pm at Spectrum Community School (957
Burnside Road W)

Tuesday, November 15th from 7 pm to 9 pm at Reynolds Secondary School (3963
Borden Street)

Time for Some Changes - Part 5

2011-10-29T11:15:00.000-07:00

Oct. 28, 2011
By Linda Travers

Today I’ll talk about fairness and efficiency of public input.

SD61’s Bylaw 9360 General Meeting of the Board states that the meetings will be conducted in two major sections. The first being the agenda, minutes and acceptance of presentations from the public and employee groups. The second section will be for the consideration of Board Committee Reports and Special Reports to the Board.

The public presentations will be limited to 5 minutes for each individual with a limit of 3 speakers per issue. Also that there will be no public debate with presenters as only information will be received. As well, the total public time will be limited to 30 minutes.

There are problems with this Bylaw.

First, speakers wanting to make public presentations must contact the Board Secretary with their topic title on the Wednesday before the Monday meeting. This timing is also a problem as the agenda for the meeting is not posted until the Friday following the Wednesday. A speaker is at the mercy of the Board Chair as to whether or not he will allow someone to speak to an issue on the agenda if they haven’t met the Wednesday deadline.

Second, is the monitoring of the public presentations. The Bylaw says the total public time is 30 minutes. One would assume that with only 3 public speakers, then each speaker would be entitled to 10 minutes. However, all speakers are told to wrap up their presentation as their 5 minutes is up.

Third, public input comes at the beginning of the Agenda. That means that the public has no opportunity to comment on any reports being given. It is interesting to see on Agendas from other school districts, that after the Superintendent has given a report there is a 15 minute public question/comments time. And also after Action items such as a Capital Project Bylaw, impacts of government rulings etc. there is a second public question/comment period.

Fourth, public presentation time is also used for employee groups’ presentations. All of the employee groups sit at the Board table. I would assume that privilege means they are entitled to speak at any time.

The current trustees have practiced this culture of impeding public participation for many years. Vote for new trustees who will encourage authentic democracy and full accountability to the common good.

Time for Some Changes - Part 4

2011-10-21T16:13:00.000-07:00

Oct. 20,2011
by Linda Travers

Have you ever arrived at a public meeting to find people standing around because they were locked out of the meeting room? That’s what usually happens when you arrive at SD61 (Greater Victoria) Board of Education meetings held at the Tolmie Building. SD trustee meetings held there are usually preceded by In-Camera meetings so hence the locked door.

Because In-Camera decisions were rarely disclosed at the public meetings, I had to use Section 72 of the School Act that says that 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, and the record must be open for inspection at all reasonable times by any person.In reading those records, I discovered that SD61 Bylaw 9255.2 was not being followed. Trustees were discussing matters which should have been discussed in public.

With Trustee Pitre’s help we initiated the writing of the new Bylaw for In- Camera meetings. It is Bylaw 9360.1 dated March 28, 2011. It says that In-Camera items that may be discussed confidentially include legal, property, personnel and privacy matters as defined by provincial legislation. And that any matter to be brought to the public from an In-Camera meeting will be done upon an approved motion of the Board. I am pleased that now the Section 72 report can be read on the SD61 website - http://www.sd61.bc.ca/boardagendas.aspx. Unfortunately the general nature of the decisions reached are still not being recorded. Also, matters beyond legal, property, personnel and privacy are being discussed.

Question: Would electing new trustees on Nov. 19, 2011 ensure a more open, transparent attitude to the sharing of information?

How to judge a School Board candidate - by their record

2011-10-18T21:37:00.000-07:00

Reposted from Staffroom Confidential. Read the post here.
Written by Tara Ehrcke

With Trustee elections less than a month away, my usual frustration is mounting over how little "accountability" there is for School Board Trustees.

Every Trustee candidate I know would proudly say that they "support public education". That they will "stand up for schools and communities". That they will be "advocates".

Sorry. That's not good enough. I hear those phrases from the 1% when they are in fact trying to pass policies that do exactly the opposite.

So my advice to anyone out there thinking about who to vote for? Watch what they DO, not what they SAY. Huge difference.

Let's take Victoria Trustees for example.

Probably all 13 running for School Board would say they support "quality" education. Many would say they support "small classes" and "supports for students". But the raw reality is this:

Only ONE....that's right ONE Trustee actually voted AGAINST a class organization that included HUNDREDS of classes that exceed School Act limits. That one was Catherine Alpha.

Despite their "progressive" leanings and profession of supporting teachers, students and schools, not a single other incumbent Trustee insisted that class sizes and class composition in Victoria schools should stay within the legislated limits by voting against the class organization report (the limits are 30 students, no more than 3 with special needs). Not even the candidates (Peg Orcherton and Bev Horsman) who were endorsed by the Labour Council would stand up for kids and classroom conditions and insist that legislated limits are adhered to by voting against the report.

It's very easy for candidates to say all the things they know that you want to hear...right around election time. Be careful and insist on the facts. Only voting records and their actions in public office tell the true story.

Time for Some Changes - Part 3

2011-10-18T21:19:00.000-07:00

By Linda Travers
Oct. 18, 2011

Today, in my third article, I will focus my comments on transparency, or rather the lack of it, of the nine trustees who were elected in 2008 to the SD61 (Greater Victoria) Board of Education. The voters will be going to the polls on Nov. 19,2011 to elect nine trustees from a slate of sixteen candidates. All the current trustees are running again.

SD61 Bylaw 9368 states, “ In all meetings of the Board of Trustees, procedures shall be governed by Robert’s Rule’s of Order.” Robert’s Rules of Order are a set of rules for conducting meetings that allow everyone to be heard and to make decisions without confusion.

Over the past three years, I’ve seen much confusion by the trustees in using the rules for conducting motions to ensure SD61 business was accomplished in a clear manner. As a result there is confusion for both the trustees as well as for the public in attendance as to the intent and the implementation. It’s unfortunate that the Board Chair has not taken the opportunity to attend a course on Robert’s Rules provided by the BC School Trustee Association.

Motions from the two Committee meetings and the Board of Education meetings are recorded in the Minutes saying “It was moved and seconded…”One would have to be in attendance at the meeting to see who moved and who seconded the motions and how the trustees voted. The vote is simply recorded as “motion carried” or if it’s a motion requiring unanimous approval (usually a money or property issue) the minutes will record “motion carried unanimously. “Often it is impossible for the public to see how the trustees vote as the speakers’ podium blocks the public’s view of the trustees. It appears that if more than half of the hands go up, the Chair often omits asking for a show of hands for those opposed. Any trustee wanting their negative vote recorded in the minutes must ask to have that done.

Question: Why can’t citizens see a record of the way the elected trustees are voting on issues as is done by Boards of Education in other Districts?

Candidates in the running for Greater Victoria School District 61 municipal election

2011-10-18T20:26:00.000-07:00

There are a few new faces in the running for trustee positions in the upcoming municipal election.

Here is the list posted on Greater Victoria School District 61's website. You can find it here.

Alpha, Catherine - Incumbent
Bratzer, David
Ferris, Tom - Incumbent
Holland, Jim - Incumbent
Horsman, Bev - Incumbent
Leonard, Elaine - Incumbent
Loring-Kuhanga, Edith
McEvoy, Michael - Incumbent
McNally, Diane
Nohr, Deborah
Orcherton, Peg - Incumbent
Paynter, Rob
Pitre, David - Incumbent
Rand, David
Stern, Richard
Young, John A. - Incumbent

BClocalnews.com has published a bit more about each of the candidates listed. Read more in their Oct 14, 2011 article Candidates for board of education trustees line up

Time for Some Changes in School District 61 (Greater Victoria) - Part 2

2011-10-16T23:22:00.000-07:00

By Linda Travers
Oct. 15, 2011

The fall 2008 election for school trustees saw the replacement of two trustees – Charley Beresford who didn’t run for re-election and Mark Walsh who was defeated.
On Nov. 19, 2011 voters will decide whether or not to replace the trustees elected in 2008 - Catherine Alpha, Tom Ferris, Jim Holland, Bev. Horsman, Elaine Leonard, Michael McEvoy, Peg Orcherton, Dave Pitre and John Young.

I was saddened by the fact that these trustees refused further discussion of my suggestion at the April 6, 2011 Budget meetings to apply to the Minister of Education for two fewer SD61 trustees. I suggested that the approximately $38,000.00 per year or $190,000.00 over 5 years could pay part of a teacher’s salary or a classroom aide’s salary as just two examples to provide for unmet students’ needs parents and staff had made presentations about at Board meetings. SD61’s Mission Statement states,“ The Greater Victoria School District is committed to each student’s success in learning within a responsive and safe environment.”The School Act says,“a board consists of 3, 5, 7 or 9 trustees.”Surrey (69,109 students), Burnaby (25,764 students), Richmond, (22,971 students),and Central Okanagan (21,919 students), all with more students than SD61(20,470 students) have 7 trustees. Much larger Districts, such as Vancouver (59,978 students) and Coquitlam (32,588 students) have the same number of 9 trustees as SD61.

What is a compelling Budget priority? Is it to have the same number of Trustees as School Districts with more students? Or is it to address issues to improve the learning environment in District 61 schools?

Time for Some Changes - Part 1

2011-10-13T16:56:00.000-07:00

By Linda Travers

October 12, 2011
I first became aware of the importance of involvement in SD61 (Greater Victoria) governance after reading a press release on Jan. 17, 2007. That press release was announcing the sale of Fairburn Elementary School property in my neighbourhood to a private developer. The trustees at that time were Tom Ferris, Charlie Beresford, Jim Holland, Bev Horsman, Elaine Leonard, Michael McEvoy, Peg Orcherton, Mark Walsh and John Young. In a neighbourhood survey done by the Friends of Fairburn 62% of the respondents “were not aware” the property was for sale. No meeting was ever held to change its status from lease to sale. This sale was made despite the Board Chair’s promise in 2003 “that schools slated for closure would not be sold.”

Since then I have been attending SD61 trustee Committee & Board of Education meetings to monitor governance and decision making as it impacts on SD61 public education. It is crucial for us to elect school trustees who support policies good for public education, are financially responsible and conduct our public affairs in an open, transparent and accountable process. I believe they are well paid to do this. The June 2011 SD61 District Financial Statement shows the 9 trustees were paid $161,316.00 in remuneration and $12,895.74 in expenses, a total of $174,212.74

I will be sharing information I’ve observed from September 2009 to the present time when attending the 2 or 3 regular monthly public board meetings + the public budget meetings. I hope this information will help you to make an informed decision when electing the trustees on Nov. 19, 2011 to serve for the 2011 - 2014 term.

Trustee Election Time...Voting Day Saturday November 19, 2011

2011-10-06T13:54:00.001-07:00

BECOME INVOLVED!
If you want to see change at the Board table and you have some time please consider providing the following support.
You may help with leafleting, door knocking on your own or with the candidate of your choice,make phone calls, help with trustee forums or write letters to the editor about your experience with underfunding.
Please contact us at info@vpec.com

Update

2011-10-06T13:43:00.001-07:00

Victoria Public Education Coalition Update

October 6, 2011

Approximately one year ago, a broad based, non-partisan community coalition, United for Public Education, was established in Victoria. Victoria Public Education Coalition was one of the founding members along with Camosun College Student Society, University of Victoria Students' Society, L.A.N.D.S. ( Let's Agree Not to Dispose of School Lands), Early Childhood Educators of BC-Victoria Branch,Greater Victoria Teachers' Association, Royal Roads University Student Association, Saanich Teachers' Association, Sooke Teacher Association.

We have been involved in a variety of campaigns over the course of the year and we are now working on the FUND EDUCATION NOW campaign. United Public Education is engaging in dialogue with politicians, government, opposition critics, stakeholder groups, and the public. Energy and commitment is being directed to inform those in a place of influence or decision-making about the impact of underfunding from early childhood education to PhD.

United For Public Education is a social advocacy group that will be a watchdog as well as provide oversight to ensure that concerns are heard and remedies are made to lift the quality of public education in BC. Please review some of the following documents.

United For Public Education launches Fund Education Now Campaign

Posted on October 5, 2011 by educationbc

NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 5, 2011

Victoria – As people around the globe celebrated World Teacher's Day today, the southern Vancouver Island based coalition United for Public Education (UPE) launched the Fund Education Now campaign. The goal of the campaign is to get the BC Liberals and the BC NDP to commit to an increase in funding to the public education system.

"From pre-school to Ph.D, students face a system which is so heavily underfunded that it is coming apart at the seams," said UPE spokesperson Dylan Sherlock. "BC's lack of investment in education is making the province less competitive for recent graduates and young families."

Childcare is becoming increasingly inaccessible for the average British Columbian family and qualified educators are underpaid and overworked.

The K-12 system has the largest class sizes in Canada, crumbling infrastructure, lack of resources for students with special needs, and school districts have been forced to sell off public lands to meet squeezed budgets.

BC is the only province in Canada that doesn't have a student grants program, has the highest interest rates on student loans, and debt levels average $27,000 upon graduation.

"The people in our coalition – parents, teachers, students, tradespeople, and professionals – are looking to the BC Liberals and the BC NDP to step up and show leadership on the future of education in British Columbia," said Sherlock. "Education is the key issue that is going to decide the economic future of BC."

United for Public Education will be presenting a pre-budget submission to the government's standing committee on finance at the provincial legislature this Friday at 1:00pm.

United for Public Education (UPE) is a coalition of groups who represent every level of education in BC. We have come together to raise awareness about and take action against the chronic underfunding of public education in BC.

- 30 -

Posted on March 29, 2011 by educationbc

The public education system in British Columbia has faced years of chronic underfunding. The lack of commitment to a properly funded public education system has had a harmful impact on families across BC and society as a whole.

Did you know?

-BC has no provincial grants program for post-secondary students, has the highest interest on student loans in Canada, and students graduate with an average of $27,000 of debt.
-BC has cut over 1,200 learning specialist teachers in the K-12 system since 2001.
-Many early childhood educators are not making a living wage.

GET INVOLVED in the movement to see proper funding restored to public education.

United for Public Education (UPE) wants your input at a forum we are hosting this April.

What:
FUND EDUCATION NOW: A forum on the state of public education in British Columbia

When:
Saturday April 2, 1pm – 4pm

Where:
Michele Pujol Room, Student Union building, University of Victoria

Who:
Speakers on public education, moderated by CFAX's Adam Stirling

This is your chance to make your voice heard about the kind of public education system that you want to see.

Free childcare and light snacks are available to those who wish to attend.

United for Public Education (UPE) is a non-partisan coalition of student unions, teacher associations and other groups who represent every level of education in BC. We have come together to raise awareness about and take action against the chronic underfunding of BC's public education system.

More info:
Web: http://unitededucation.wordpress.com/
Email: UnitedPublicEd@gmail.com
Phone: (250) 721-8368

Student Debt Protest

Posted on February 28, 2011 by educationbc

The cost of providing and accessing education in BC has skyrocketed over the past few decades. Tuition has risen, student debt has risen, and the full time equivalent (FTE) grant funding to BC's post-secondary institutions has not increased to cover the real cost of enrollments.

On February 26th, British Columbia got a new premier. It is time to bring public awareness to the important issues that all students face in the post-secondary system!

The Simon Fraser Student Society, Camosun Student Society and the University of Victoria Student Society are organizing a united student protest event on the front steps of the Legislative Assembly in Victoria. There will be student society representatives, community members and coalition partners from across the province.
We want you to be there!

Event Details
When: Wednesday March 16th, 11:30am to 3:00pm
Where: Driveway and stairs in front of the BC Legislature in Victoria

There will be speakers, bands, food and opportunities for participating organizations to display information, materials and promote campaigns in support of these issues. Our goal is to help students, members of the Legislative Assembly, and the community become more informed about the cost of post-secondary education in BC.

Proposals for Change
1. Lower the Interest Rates on BC Student Loans
BC charges the highest interest rates on student loans in Canada. Some provinces charge no interest on provincial student loans, while others charge only what the government has paid to secure funds for their student loan systems.

2. Increase Loan Reduction and Create Student Grant Program
The best way to help struggling students is to target assistance to those who need it. The BC Loan Reduction Program provides grants to student-loan recipients, thereby lowering the repayable loan amount and effectively reducing the cost of their post-secondary education. In 2004 the BC grants program was axed, leaving students with even less funding. Having an upfront grants program will make post secondary education more accessible to students today.

3. Increase Public Funding to Post-Secondary Institutions
Student debt is high because the costs of a post-secondary education has increased rapidly in British Columbia in the last decade. This has resulted in BC students having the highest debt in the country with the average borrower graduating with $27,000 of debt!
a. In 2001, at SFU tuition fees were $2310 for 10 courses a year. In 2010, these fees had risen by 119% to $4815. At Camosun the tuition has increased 260%.
b. International undergraduate students now pay over $14,000 per year at SFU for the same course load domestic students take at one-third the cost.

We argue that the best way to provide accessible education is to ensure that the BC government's FTE grant funding to post-secondary institutions both matches actual enrollments and is increased to reflect the real cost to institutions of providing education in BC.

For more information on how to get involved contact:

Vancouver
Kyle Acierno
Simon Fraser Student Society
(778) 782-6563
ero@sfss.ca

Victoria
Matteus Clement
Camosun College
250.885.5758
external@camosunstudent.org

Victoria
James Coccola
University of Victoria
(250) 721-8370
uvsschr@uvic.ca

For more info check out the Facebook event: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=183780824991315

Why Education?

Posted on December 29, 2010 by educationbc

Why are we United for Public Education?

Public education is the cornerstone of our society, our economy and our democracy.

Countries that have the strongest universal public education programs always have the strongest and most stable economies and societies – and they always recover more quickly from economic or physical disasters than countries with weak public education or no public education.

Universal public education is the strongest predictor of public health. Not health care. If you want to lower your health costs, invest in early childhood education, the K-12 system, trades training and universities.

Public education saves us a fortune, both economically and emotionally. In June 2008, Canada's chief public health officer, Dr. David Butler-Jones, reported that every dollar invested in early years saves $9 in future spending on health, welfare and justice systems. That same year, Canada spent $70 billion dealing with crime, $1.8 billion of it on prisons.

A properly funded, quality public education for everyone benefits us all, enabling citizens to live happier, healthier lives and participate fully in our democracy.

School District debates Wi-Fi & Strategic Facilities Plan At OPPS Meeting - Raises questions about role of trustees

2011-06-20T11:01:00.000-07:00

The SD61 Operations, Policy, Planning and Education, Policy, Planning Committee Meetings were held June 13, 2011.

The following recording was filmed by the Citizens For Safe Technology - Victoria organization. As you can see for yourself, this recording raises some concerning questions regarding:
• a fair WiFi Comm. consultation process,
• limited and unwilling dialogue from the trustees to the public,
• trustee accountability
• equity of membership on the Comm.,
• incomplete and inaccurate dissemination of information

These are some things to keep in mind when voting in the upcoming municipal elections this fall.

Watch the recording of this debate here.

The second half of the meeting addresses discussion of the School District's Facilities Strategy Plan prepared by Stantec Consulting. This discussion too raises many questions and can be found here.

More consultation needed on school plans

2011-06-03T17:30:00.000-07:00

Recently VPEC has raised concerns about the Greater Victoria School District's Strategic Facilities Plan. You can read about it here. Heidi Darroch, a local parent, expresses further concerns in a Times Colonist letter, June 3, 2011.

By Heidi Darroch, Times ColonistJune 3, 2011

Re: "School district plan ignores local realities," May 20.

I am writing to express my concern about how the Greater Victoria School District 61 is handling its recent facilities plan.

I found the document long on generic "solutions" to poorly formulated questions and challenges. Noting that the report was the short version, I emailed the school district to request the comprehensive plan.

To my dismay, the response I received - inadvertently - was from a district administrative assistant who cc-ed me on her message to an administrator. She wrote that she would check her minutes to find out if I am the parent she remembers speaking at a district budget meeting. (I did address a board budget session a couple of years ago. I didn't expect that to disqualify me from making an information query two years later.)
Continue reading here.

SAANICH STUDENTS NEED YOUR HELP

2011-06-02T15:17:00.000-07:00

The following is a letter from the Saanich District PAC of School District 63.

Dear Saanich School District Families,

We are very fortunate to live in a wonderful part of British Columbia and enrol our children in the Saanich public education school district of which we could all be proud.

Over the last ten years, our Saanich Board of Education and district executive have been managing our schools very well during a time of underfunding of public education and have balanced budgets using reserves and very significant budget cuts each year. Schools were closed, staffing reduced, efficiencies were made and everyone learned to manage with less, while still being as innovative and adaptive as possible.

However, at this time our Saanich Board of Education no longer believes the same budget strategy can continue without negatively impacting our students’ education, with more projected budget cuts this year and in the next few years to come. It has taken a new path and we ask that you now take a few minutes of your time to read the following information about the district budget, how it gets its money and how it spends. This is a very complex process, but we have presented it in a concise and clear manner. Then after reviewing this information, draw your own conclusion about the board’s decision and Saanich’s public education system and then take the appropriate action.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Sincerely,

COPACS (Saanich District PAC)

BUDGET 2011/2012

On April 27, 2011 the Saanich Board of Education passed the following motion:

That the 2011/12 Operating Budget be submitted to include $2.5 million for programs and services to meet the student needs as per the Budget Advisory Committee gap list and $328,000 to ensure no further reductions in the 2011/12 budget for a total of $2.828 million additional revenue from the provincial government.

This is an ‘unbalanced’ budget and contravenes the School Act which requires boards of education to develop and adopt a balanced budget by June 30^th and manage operating funds within the funding levels provided as per section 111(3) and 113(1)(a) of the School Act.

The board acknowledges that the consequence of trying to table a ‘balanced’ budget would mean further reductions of programs and services for our children. Contravening of the Act could result in the removal of our school trustees and the appointment of an official trustee by the Ministry of Education. Our Saanich board is not concerned about its own future and is instead placing the needs of our students first. The board is deeply concerned about the negative and compounding effect of continuing reductions to the budget and the ability to provide programs and services required to meet student needs.

The following pages provide some of the information to understand this decision.

Read the rest of this letter here.

What can you do in Victoria?

SD 61's Chair Ferris reported that the board had approved the 3rd reading of the 2011/2012 Annual Budget Bylaw by a poll vote on April 12, 2011. If only our own Greater Victoria School District Board of Education would take a strong stand for our District's students collectively with the Victoria Confederation PAC (VCPAC).

In November 2011 we will be electing School District 61 trustees. Will you elect school trustees like those of Saanich School District 63 who are willing to take a stronger stand for fully funded public education? In preparation for the upcoming Board of Education election, ask the following trustees listed below why they refused to submit a budget that reflects the true needs of schools and students.

If you believe a strong stand for fully funded public education needs to happen in School District 61 ask the Victoria Confederation Parent Advisory Committee to encourage trustees to do as Saanich School District trustees have done.

VCPAC info@vcpac.ca

Board of Education Chair Tom Ferris tferris@sd61.bc.ca

Vice Chair Trustee Dave Pitre dpitre@sd61.bc.ca

Trustee Bev Horseman bevhorsman@shaw.ca

Trustee Jim Holland jholland@bc.anglican.ca

Trustee John Young johnayoung@telus.net

Trustee Elaine Leonard eleonard@sd61.bc.ca

Trustee Michael McEvoy (BCSTA president) mmcevoy@sd61.bc.ca

Trustee Peg Orcherton sorcherton@telus.net

Trustee Catherine Alpha cprime4@gmail.com

BC School Trustees Association bcsta@bcsta.org

Also email the Minister of Education. Honourable George Abbott, Minister of Education Minister.EDUC@gov.bc.ca (NOTE: Every email is registered at the Ministry of Education so each email counts!)

Does SD 61’s Strategic Facilities Plan strategically avoid engaging the public in its proposal to decommission unused space & right size schools?

2011-05-26T09:51:00.000-07:00

The public received its first opportunity to hear about the Greater Victoria School District’s government mandated Strategic Facilities Plan on May10, 2011 in draft form, presented by a rep from the contracted company, Stantec Consulting. No copies were available for the public at the meeting but you can find it on their website here. The report was not publicly available before the meeting, nor was it made available to trustees in advance, thus making it difficult to come prepared with any feedback or questions. Is it inadvertent that this is the only meeting scheduled for public input or will there be future opportunities for public consultation? Only a handful of trustees were in attendance and along with fewer than 30 members of the public.

David Bratzer’s Op Ed, “School district plan ignores local realities: Boilerplate proposal disregards history, fails to engage community,” (Times Colonist May 20, 2011) points out the flaws in this plan in three main areas: process, content and value for money. These themes are frequently evidenced throughout SD 61’s “consultative processes.”

Bratzer indicates that the content of the report is simplistic and repetitive in nature. For schools with low enrollment such as Craigflower or Vic West Elementary it encourages the Board of Education to consider 3 options: decommissioning unused space, “right sizing” or boosting enrollment by adding further programs. None of these are simple options. The report suggests similar options for all schools with low enrollment. The report goes on to recommend Quadra and George Jay Elementary schools be combined into one. Will one of these two schools be quietly readied for sale? The plan also recommends that any school over capacity set new limits for out-of catchment students.

Also disturbing is the lack of access to information that should be publicly available. As Bratzer points out, the cost of the report was not listed in the document. However, at the meeting his request for a costing of this provincially mandated process was met with the suggestion to FOIPOP the district by the secretary treasurer. Trustee Bev Horsman was quick to point out that the question of cost was fair and the District should be able to provide this information at the next meeting. It should not be necessary to FOIPOP the district in order to access what should be publicly available is becoming common practice. Bratzer raises further financial concerns:

Is the district receiving valuable and specific information in exchange for its financial investment?

Much of the wording in the PowerPoint presentation is identical to a presentation given by Stantec to the Okanagan Skaha School District on April 6. Each presentation is available on its respective district website. A slide-by-slide review makes it clear that boilerplate language was used in many instances. This includes critical elements like the vision statement.

“One can only hope that managers in the Greater Victoria School District were able to negotiate a "cut and paste" discount.”

Bratzer raises an interesting point about the similarities between the Okanagan Skaha School District’s document and the Greater Victoria’s. These two districts also share another interesting connection: the former president of the BC Trustees Association (BCSTA) comes from Okanagan Skaha and their new president comes from Victoria. Should we be worried about the BCSTA’s motion to help ease the sale of surplus school lands easier as blogged about here? Will Strategic Facilities Plans across the province all have this same cut and paste appearance?

Of additional concern is Stantec's methodology, providing enrollment projections which stop at 2020. With the echo-boomers boosting the birthrate this is a serious over-sight. More realistically, Capital Planning for schools should be conducted on a 10-30 year time horizon, not 8.5 years. Will a short-sighted plan such as this one lead to over-crowded playgrounds and sports fields, filled with endless portables to meet the needs of the echo-boomers children?

Members of the public are invited to provide feedback to the draft Strategic Facilities Plan to Facility_Plan@sd61.bc.ca Please consider sharing your feedback here as well so that it can be shared with others who may have similar concerns.

Media Release: One Trustee Votes Against the Ministry Budget

2011-05-18T16:53:00.000-07:00

Media Release

Mon. May 9, 2011

Victoria Public Education Coalition

Greater Victoria School Board

ONE TRUSTEE VOTES AGAINST THE MINISTRY BUDGET

Trustee Catherine Alpha was the only member of the Victoria School Board to vote against the district budget at the board meeting on April 11, 2011. “ I believe that when we pass the budget it should be meeting the needs of all students. I became a trustee to be a voice for the students in our classrooms who need extra support with their learning in order to achieve their potential. I believe in equity of access to education and when we do not fully support the needs of all students we disenfranchise the most vulnerable. Students with special learning needs desire full with support and that is not achieved in large classes where many are grouped together and sufficient support is not provided.” I’m glad the surplus of $72,000 was put towards classrooms but this does not meet the demands of over 300 classes in violation of Bill 33 legislated limits.”

Catherine Alpha

695 Polyanthus Crescent

V8Z 2J3

25 with0-744-1884

Province dumping its costs on schools

2011-05-18T16:03:00.000-07:00

BY CATHERINE ALPHA, TIMES COLONIST MAY 18, 2011

The Liberal government continues to download costs onto school boards.

Sixty school districts across B.C. are being asked to absorb $3 million in property insurance premiums previously paid by the provincial government.

The Greater Victoria board will need an additional $125,900, effectively wiping out our small budget surplus that the board directed towards serving the needs of students in our classrooms.

Premier Christy Clark has told us that she wants to "put families first." I invite her to do so. The downloading of costs must stop. The win by the B.C. Teachers' Federation in B.C. Supreme Court, and the government's decision not to appeal, means that class size and composition issues must be addressed.

Question: When is a Meeting Not a Meeting?

2011-05-17T13:33:00.000-07:00

Answer: When it is a School District 61 Committee meeting.

Traditionally there has been an Education, Policy and Planning Committee meeting on the first Monday of the month. And on the second Monday of the month there has been an Operations, Policy and Planning Committee meeting. The Board of Education meeting has been on the third Monday of the month.

The two Committee meetings have usually been the best opportunities for the public to engage with the trustees. Such matters pertaining to “ensuring each student’s success in learning within a responsive and safe environment” which I’ve quoted from the SD61 Mission Statement is the mandate of the trustees.

Engagement between the trustees and the public has been a problem this year. The trustees combined the Committee meeting dates in Sept., Oct., Nov. Jan., Mar. and May. As well, all December meetings were cancelled. These combined meetings mean fewer opportunities for trustees and the public to converse together. Note: the public may be given permission to speak for 5 minutes at Board of Education meetings. The trustees provide no responses and therefore limit their public accountability.

I printed this Agenda http://www.sd61.bc.ca/opsmeetings.aspx for the May 9 combined committee meeting. I was somewhat surprised that the usual Agenda section of “Public Request to the Committee” from the Education Policy meetings was omitted. Upon arriving at the meeting I was again surprised that neither of the Committee Chairs opened the meeting. It was also surprising that there was no approval of the Agenda, no approval of Apr. 4 minutes or business arising from them and only 3 of 4 sections of the New Business/Notice of Motions were addressed. These in fact were presentations, not New Business/Notice of Motions. Upon completion of only the presentations, the meeting, with no formal motion to adjourn, ended abruptly.

And so, at the only meeting this month where the public expected to dialogue with trustees, that opportunity did not happen. Do we really need nine trustees being paid $170,998.86?

Come to a Trustee Committee meeting. Let’s hope you will experience the planned business from the Agenda rather than another non-meeting.

by Linda Travers