#512 - 03/03/08 11:16 PM
Trustees should spend less time behind closed door
|
Katherine Wagner
enthusiast
Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 253
Loc: British Columbia
|
School trustees should spend less time behind closed doors
School Watch by Katherine Wagner
A shorter version was originally published in The Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Times, Friday, February 29, 2008
Driving through Maple Ridge, B.C. during school hours, I pulled up to the corner of 210th Street and 123rd Avenue, and paused as a silver car flashed by. The driver obviously didn’t notice the speed limit for the school zone in front of Laity View Elementary. I turned the corner and half-a-block later was crawling along at less than 10 km/h behind the same silver sedan.
The driver had suddenly taken note of the reduced speed limit alongside neighbouring Volker Park.
A speeding hazard through the school zone and too slow through the park zone – clearly an example of unsafe driving. However, without providing detail the driver could claim an average of 30 km/h and leave the impression she had acted responsibly.
Politicians and public institutions like to present averages to prove they are doing a great job. However, a lot can be hidden within averages, and behind closed doors.
K-12 education is a public institution governed by two levels of politicians and almost entirely paid for with taxpayer dollars.
The public has a right to know what is going on.
A desire to “control the message” and a deeply rooted reluctance to share information, starts at the top of the education system and works its way down.
Education reporter Janet Steffenhagen writes for the Vancouver Sun. Last November, she expressed some frustration with access to information in a post to her blog titled The Education Ministry: Where everything is top secret , “…the Liberals allow only two people to speak to the media on behalf of the education ministry: (Education Minister) Shirley Bond and the manager of communications. The latter is not to be quoted and all others are off-limits…”
School boards also expend effort denying access to information.
Since it was elected in November 2005, SD 42s school board has concerned itself with access to information. An ongoing issue has been whether newly elected trustees could access the closed meeting minutes of the previous board.
Newly elected trustees felt at a disadvantage unless they could bring themselves up to speed around motions the previous school board had approved in-camera. They pointed out that having taken the oath of office they were bound to uphold confidentiality.
Incumbent trustees Ashlie, Marshall, Rempel, and Ward did not budge (see page five of the public school board meeting minutes from January 25, 2006), but the issue of trustee access to information did not go away.
A simple solution would be to change school board policy to strictly limit what occurs in closed meetings – largely negating a future need for access to the closed minutes of a previous terms school board.
In December 2007, trustee Stepan Vdovine attempted to have the clause, “Such other matters of a confidential nature where the Board decides the public interest so requires”, removed from the local bylaw governing closed meetings. This change would fully align the by-law wording with the Community Charter governing municipal councils. (For additional background on this please read my *note at the bottom of this article.)
Vdovine expressed concern about too many issues being discussed in closed meetings that more appropriately should be discussed in public.
Trustees rejected the amendment with trustees Butler and Rempel abstaining from the vote.
Trustees engaged in further political sparring around access to information. Some of it took place behind closed doors where trustees rewrote another bylaw on the issue proposed by Vdovine. This was before allowing it onto the agenda of a public meeting.
The local board of education spends a lot of time behind closed doors.
Twice-monthly public meetings are generally two to three hours long. Up to an hour of that time is devoted to presentations, delegations, public questions and a “good news” roundtable.
In-camera (closed to the public) meetings are typically as long, or longer, than the public meetings. In addition to the closed business meeting, trustees meet in-camera for various committee-of-the-whole (all trustees) meetings. These are usually two hours long and are scheduled to occur before the closed meeting in the afternoon before public meetings. In addition, school trustees meet for “board workdays” at least once a month and they are rarely open to the public.
Members of the public are often hurried out the door as the public meetings end by an announcement from the Board Chair that trustees need to convene, yet again, behind closed doors.
Information that is available to the public is often difficult to find, assuming the public even knows it exists.
Provincial school board furor about new legislation allowing parents and students to appeal beyond the school board is an example.
Paradoxically, school trustees across the province point to the fact that few parents and students have taken advantage of a right most are unaware of (or afraid to use). They suggest this indicates there is little need for a further level of appeal.
Existing communication vehicles such as websites, newsletters and student planners are chock full of details about student and parental responsibilities. It is rare to find any mention of parent and student rights and recourse if they disagree with a decision.
Parents and students can be paralyzed into inaction by feelings of intimidation and concern about the unintended consequences of taking action.
Some take their concerns directly to the media, knowing that public scrutiny provides a level of protection to individuals.
Some small changes by both levels of government in charge of public education could cast some much needed light on decision-making processes and information within the Ministry, school districts and schools.
The provincial government should add “open meeting” language to its existing freedom of information legislation, to ensure that a quorum of a public body, such as a board of school trustees, cannot legally meet and discuss public business outside of a properly constituted meeting (which, under the School Act, requires a staff member be present to record the proceedings).
Further, the province should tighten School Act language about in-camera meetings. The School Act is vague and gives broad discretion to Boards of Education to decide what they feel constitutes the “public interest” when placing discussions, debate and decisions behind closed doors. ( 69 (2)If, in the opinion of the board, the public interest so requires, persons other than trustees may be excluded from a meeting.)
SD42s board of education is currently accepting submissions for consideration as part of its 2008/09 budget.
I have a suggestion for them and the fifty-eight other boards of elected school trustees in British Columbia.
Fund the creation of three new positions in each district (sharing the positions between two or more small districts makes sense) and ensure the incumbents can do their work without political interference:
1) A school district ombudsman to ensure fair local processes;
2) A public information/conflict-of-interest officer to ensure information is understandable, in context, and accessible to parents, students and the public at every level of the district;
3) An advocate to provide advice and support to parents and students in conflict with the system.
Even one of these positions in each district would go a long way toward shining a light into the darker corners of our school system.
Note:
In the interest of disclosure regarding my context for some comments here in:
I was an elected school trustee on the SD#42 board from December 1996 until I decided not to run for re-election in November 2005.
Over the years, I tried several approaches to increasing the transparency of local-decision-making.
School trustees on the board had some discussions about accountability and transparency. We committed to moving "as much as possible" into open meetings.
I had concerns about how quickly this was happening.
During the 2004/05 school year, I rewrote local bylaws governing closed trustee meetings and presented them to the board for consideration (notice of my motion on February 23rd, 2005 and consideration of my motion on March 9th, 2005). I used the Community Charter as a template.
The board adopted my recommendations but it was made clear to me that if I wanted support for my amendments they would require the addition of another clause – essentially a clause that would give the board an “out” and allow it to place any item or issue it wants to into closed meeting. (please note the secretary treasurers comments** as reflected in the minutes which are linked below - essentially recommending that if the board did not want to substantially change its practices it should either defeat or amend my proposed by-laws).
There was much discussion and debate at the open meeting when this came up. Please note that the "amendment" was placed on the table for a vote BEFORE the main motion was placed on the table. This is not normal practice.
I supported this addition in order to at least get the main body of my amendments into the bylaw. A partial victory can still be considered a victory – in politics, it is often small incremental steps that achieve a goal.
The relevant minutes can be read by clicking here.
I would also add that it was completely unnecessary - in my opinion - for the Board to add the clause "such other matters of a confidential nature where the Board decides the public interest so require." (incidentally, this is also the clause Trustee Stepan Vdovine recently tried - unsuccessfully - to have removed)
Because the School Act allows boards to place anything they believe is in the public interest behind closed doors, the Board could, at any time, vote by two-thirds majority to waive its own bylaw. The catch is, they would have to do that in public. It seemed like appropriate self-imposed accountability to me.
**The comments of the Secretary Treasurer, as recorded in the minutes.
Quote from page 10 of the March 9th, 2005 minutes of the public meeting of the board of school trustees, British Columbia school district number 42:
“The Secretary Treasurer (Don Woytowich) gave a report on the implications of amending the Procedural Bylaw Section B – Part A as suggested by Trustee Wagner. He said a move to the proposed amendment would significantly alter the manner in which the Board currently does business. He suggested that the Board had two options to consider: 1) amend the bylaw as recommended by Trustee Wagner, or defeat the amendment, thereby defeating the bylaw. The proposed bylaw is consistent with the restrictive environment under which municipalities operate.”
End note: The principles of good governance within a democracy are the same whether we are talking about the federal government, provincial government, municipal councils or school boards. The principles must be upheld by the public and their elected representatives at every level.
Open government quotes….
"Democratic governance involves public debate and open decision-making; hence, the organization of interest groups, the free exchange of ideas, opinions and information is essential. Addressing the information and communication needs of the poor is also essential - the poor often lack information that is vital to their lives – information on basic rights and entitlements, information on public services, health, education, employment etc. They also lack visibility and voice to enable them to define policy priorities and access resources." United Nations Development Programme
"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful . . .and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." ~ George Orwell, 1946
"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." ~ Patrick Henry June 5, 1788
Edited by Katherine Wagner (03/06/08 05:20 PM)
Edit Reason: To expand the "note" at the end of the article.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#517 - 03/04/08 11:03 AM
Re: Trustees should spend less time behind closed
[Re: Katherine Wagner]
|
Tunya Audain
journeyman
Registered: 12/05/07
Posts: 87
|
CAUTION: BOBBLE-HEADS AT WORK
What an eye-opener! I suspected as much, having attended scores of school board meetings across the Lower Mainland over 30 years – that most of the “business” of the boards is done in secret.
Bobble-heads. That’s what you see at public Board meetings –- a lot of nodding, little debate, much agreement (seems all rehearsed), a public show of “officials” sitting at the ready to answer questions, carefully constructed statements from some who hope to be quoted in the local newspaper, the superintendent sitting right next to the Chairman of the Board……
What a farce! It's the biggest consumer fraud going! In the 70's Nat Hentoff writing in the Village Voice said that: public education is the biggest consumer fraud going. And so it continues. How come there are so many similarities in these public education systems across North America? What are the homogenizing forces that they are so lock-step? How do well-meaning public citizens, upon being elected "trustees", become socialized into being puppets of the system? And, how are dissidents treated?
Are there cult rituals and obediences that must be performed?
Such posturing, for what? To protect the industry? To continue the cover-up of poor performance? Do they hear the lamentations?
This is what front-line parents and observers see, as noted by Heather in her column:
“Ever see a child wet himself because he/she's so stressed? Or pull hair from their head and leave a bald spot? Or cry themselves to sleep every night? Or bite their nails to bleeding.........? This is not just logistics, it's little people's lives being molded by people with agendas. And that is just wrong.”
Is there any reason why the Boards of Education shouldn’t be abolished? If someone ran for Board election this coming Fall, and somehow got elected running on the platform of abolishing boards, would they be disqualified if they refused to take the Oath of Confidentiality?
Tunya Audain
Edited by Tunya Audain (03/04/08 11:22 AM)
Edit Reason: spelling
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#560 - 03/14/08 07:51 AM
RE: Trustees should spend less time behind closed
[Re: Greg Cross]
|
Tunya Audain
journeyman
Registered: 12/05/07
Posts: 87
|
There is something lacking in the notion of large school boards that may cause them to easily slide into dysfunctionality, irrelevance, and counterproductivity.
Are there not checks and balances? Are boards being used as middle-men to give an illusion of "public control" vs vested interest mouthpieces? Is it inbuilt bureaucracy fulfilling it's own survival imperative? Is it hierarchy asserting itself till the most incompetent rise to the top?
We've had school boards in BC dismissed and replaced by a senior government. Here is an example, in Georgia, USA, of a board that is on the verge of disaccreditation for being dysfunctional, run by union members, and generally abusive of power.
Georgia students ponder future...
Edited by Heather (03/15/08 10:37 PM)
Edit Reason: keeping the original title
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Katherine Wagner
|
|
The Schools We Need
