MINUTES
Toronto District School Board
October 28, 1998
A meeting of the Toronto District School Board convened at 7:40 p.m. in the Board Room at 155 College Street, Toronto, Ontario with Gail Nyberg, Chair of the Board, presiding.
The following members were present: Trustees Irene Atkinson, Brian Blakeley, Donna Cansfield, Diane Cleary, Judi Codd, Christine Ferreira, Gerri Gershon, Suzan Hall, Elizabeth Hill, Jeff Kendall, Shelley Laskin, Sheine Mankovsky, Ron McNaughton, David Moll, Barbara D. Nash, Gail Nyberg, Stephnie Payne, Lilein Schaeffer, Doug Stephens, Mike Thomas, and Sheila Ward.
Regrets were received from Trustee Elizebeth Moyer.
238. Approval of Agenda
Trustee Blakeley, seconded by Trustee Hall, moved: That the agenda be approved.
The motion was carried.
239. Temporary Chair
Trustee Hall, Vice-Chair, presided from time to time during the meeting.
240. Declarations of Possible Conflicts of Interest
Trustee Blakeley declared a possible conflict of interest with regard to the following matters, indicating that the general nature of his interest is that he is an employee of the union which represents support staff. He did not take part in the discussion or vote on these matters when considered by the Committee in the Whole, in private, and by the Board.
• in private session (Committee of the Whole): - Support staff terminations - Update on negotiations (support staff)
• in public session: - Union-Staff Redeployment Committee - Joint Union/Federation/Staff/Student Consultative Committee - Discussion of Federated Staffing Matters
Trustee Ward declared a possible conflict of interest with regard to the item entitled "Request for proposal - Banking Services" presented as part of Report No. 14 of the Standing Committee. She stated that the general nature of her interest is that she is an employee of the Bank of Montreal. She did not take part in the discussion or vote on this matter when considered by the Board.
531 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 Trustee Kendall declared a possible conflict of interest with regard to the negotiations (support staff). He stated that the nature of his interest is that his mother is a school secretary. He did not take part in the discussion or vote on this matter when considered by the Committee of the Whole, in private, and by the Board.
Trustee Cansfield declared a possible conflict of interest with regard to the following two matters: (a) Student Information System; and (b) "Financial Information Systems Update" presented as part of Report No. 14 of the Standing Committee (Private Session). She stated that the nature of her interest is that her husband is an employee of IBM Canada. She did not take part in the discussion or vote on these matters when considered by the Committee of the Whole, in private, and by the Board.
241. Confirmation of Minutes
Trustee Stephens, seconded by Trustee Schaeffer, moved: That the minutes of the meeting of the Toronto District School Board held on Wednesday, September 23, 1998, be confirmed.
The motion was carried.
242. Delegations
(a) Oral presentations
The Board heard presentations from the following:
• Janet Dalziel (Toronto School Administrators Association) and Annie Kidder (parent) on the Interim Selection, Promotion and Placement Procedure for Principals and Vice-Principals.
• Karen Mock (League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith Canada), Cornell Wright (Law Student, University of Toronto) and Alejandro Morales (Hispanic Development Council) on the Antiracism and Ethnocultural Equity Draft Policy.
• Carol Tough (Highview Child Care Centre) on the Child Care in Schools Draft Policy.
(b) Written Submissions
The Board considered the following written submissions:
On the Proposed Child Care Policy
• Katheryne Schulz (Chief Negotiator, CUPE Local 2484) • Joel & Brenda Gladstone (parents, Beatty Buddies Daycare) • David & Anne Weintraub (parents, Beatty Buddies Daycare) • Chris Penny (parent) • S. Valenta (parent, Beatty Buddies Daycare) • Jack Chiu & Yuk-Ling Leung (parents, Beatty Buddies Daycare) • Ed McDonough & Carol Kysela (ratepayers) • Michael Babier (parent, Beatty Buddies Daycare) • Kelly Chevolleau (ratepayer) • Wendy Clark (Toronto Coalition for Better Child Care) • Kimberley Carter (parent)
532 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
• A. Rood (parent, Beatty Buddies Daycare) • Board of Directors (Orde Street Daycare)
On the Proposed Antiracism and Ethnocultural Equity Policy
• Courtnay McFarlane (Youth Worker, Davenport Perth Neighbourhood Center) • Margaret Nosworthy (President - Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) • Margaret Schneider ( Rainbow Classroom Network) • June Larkin (Executive Committee of Educators for Gender Equity) • Debbie Douglas (Inside Out Film and Video Festival) • Lynda Lemberg (representing Oakwood Collegiate Staff) • Suzanne Ziegler (former Chief Research Officer, Toronto Board of Education) • Tara Goldstein (Assistant Professor, OISE) • Patty Barclay (representing Oasis Alternative S.S. Staff) • Nick J. Mulϑ (Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Rights in Ontario) • Terry Singh (Co-Chair, Scarborough Community and Race Relations Committee) • Kyle Rae (City Councillor, Toronto Downtown) • Olivia Chow (City Councillor, Toronto Downtown) • Alison Kemper (Executive Director, Church Street Community Centre) • Anthony Mohamed (Special Projects Coordinator, Inner City Health Program) • Robert D. Katz (President, Urban Alliance on Race Relations) • Vicki Bismilla (Principal, Highland Heights, Scarborough) • Ronald Foster (Teacher, Father and Members of Parents, Friends and Families of Lesbians and Gays) • Margot Francis (Centre for Independent Visual Media and Education)
On the Establishment of a Joint Union/Federation/Staff/Student Consultative Committee on Adult and Continuing Education
• Susan Nielsen (Toronto Adult Student Alliance)
Trustee Ferreira moved, seconded by Trustee Blakeley: That the Board receive the above delegations and written submissions.
The motion was carried.
243. Communication from the Minister of Education and Training - Distribution of Material
Trustee McNaughton, seconded by Trustee Payne, moved: That the communication from the Minister of Education and Training, dated September 22, 1998, regarding the distribution of material from Canada News Wire, be received.
The motion was carried.
244. Communication from the Rainbow District School Board - OPSBA Membership
Trustee Hall, seconded by Trustee Gershon, moved: That the communication from the Rainbow District School Board, dated September 15, 1998, regarding the merits of renewing its membership in the Ontario Public School Boards Association (OPSBA), be received.
533 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 The motion was carried.
245. Communication from the Chair of the Toronto Catholic District School Board - Reimbursement by Ministry of Membership in Trustee Associations
Trustee Atkinson, seconded by Trustee Cansfield, moved:
(a) That the communication from the Chairman of the Board for the Toronto Catholic District School Board, dated September 14, 1998, regarding the issue of the Ministry of Education reimbursing school boards for membership in trustee associations, be received; and
(b) That the Chair of the Board forward a similar letter to the Minister of Education and Training, with copies to the Toronto Catholic District School Board and OPSBA.
The motion was carried.
246. Communication from the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board - Pupil Accommodation - Request for Delay for the Determination of Surplus Space
Trustee Gershon, seconded by Trustee Atkinson, moved: That the communication from the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board, dated September 24, 1998, regarding a request for a two year delay for the determination of a Board's surplus space in exchange for future funding for new pupil places, be received.
The motion was carried.
Staff undertook to obtain for trustees a copy of the Court Decision cited in the letter.
247. Interim Selection, Promotion and Placement Procedure for Principals and Vice- Principals
The Board considered a staff report and an addendum, both dated October 28, 1998, regarding the interim selection, promotion and placement procedure for principals and vice-principals. The addendum provided further explanation and additional information on some of the issues covered in the report, including:
• the composition of interview teams • the role of trustees and parents in the design of the profile of the Principal or Vice- Principal • the consultation and involvement of trustees and parents in the draft plans for transfers and placements.
Staff advised that these changes could be integrated into the main document.
Trustee Laskin, seconded by Trustee Hall, moved: That the Board meet in Committee of the Whole, in public, to consider the Interim Selection, Promotion and Placement Procedure for Principals and Vice-Principals.
The motion to meet in Committee of the Whole was carried.
534 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 On motion of Trustee Laskin, the Committee of the Whole integrated into the Procedure the changes suggested by staff in their addendum, and made additional changes in integrating the role of trustees and parents into the procedure.
On motion of Trustee Mankovsky, the Committee of the Whole changed section D - Anti-Racism and Ethno-Cultural Equity Policy to that shown in the approved procedure.
The Committee of the Whole rose and recommended:
(a) That the Interim Selection, Promotion and Placement Procedure for Principals and Vice-Principals be adopted as amended (see page 549);
(b) That consultation continue during this school year; and
(c) That a report on a final Procedure be brought back to the Board in May of 1999.
Trustee Laskin, seconded by Trustee Gershon, moved: That the recommendations of the Committee of the Whole be adopted.
The motion was carried.
Trustee Atkinson, seconded by Trustee Ferreira, moved: That staff take into consideration the following fields of expertise to be included in the list of additional skills and job requirements: Inner City, English as a Second Language, Music, Computers, French, After-Four Programs and Parenting Programs.
Trustee Gershon, seconded by Trustee Hall, moved: That this matter be referred to the Director of Education, for a report back to the Board.
The motion to refer was carried.
Arising from the above report, Trustee Moll, seconded by Trustee Atkinson, moved:
(a) That the Director of Education develop a policy for performance review for principals and vice-principals;
(b) That the policy include an appropriate role for the parent representative, school profile and local trustee; and
(c) That the Director of Education report back to the Board regarding this issue.
The motion was carried.
248. Responses to the Education Improvement Commission: The Future Role of School Councils
The Board had for information a staff report, dated October 16, 1998, and titled "Toronto District School Board - Responses to the Education Improvement Commission: The Future Role of School Councils".
On October 7, 1998, Toronto District School Board Trustees G. Gershon, S. Hall, S. Laskin and Supervisory Officers S. Bate and D. Leaver presented two response papers and a copy of the
535 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 draft policy and procedures, Parent Community and Student Involvement to the Education Improvement Commission panel. The trustee and staff responses were attached to the report.
Trustee Kendall, seconded by Trustee Cleary, moved: That the responses to the Education Improvement Commission regarding the Discussion Paper "The Future Role of School Councils" be received.
The motion was carried.
249. Union-Staff Redeployment Committee
The Board had for consideration the following staff report, dated October 9, 1998, and titled "Union-Staff Redeployment Committee".
The Board, at its meeting of September 23, 1998, approved the establishment of a joint union- staff Redeployment Committee to assist the Toronto District School Board with the process of restructuring.
Over the next 24 months, the Board will be required to adjust its central administrative support to achieve an alignment with the level of funding provided under provincial funding formulae. The staff who will be affected by these adjustments are, in the majority, represented by C.U.P.E., Local 4400.
It is recognized that when the Board makes restructuring decisions, the implementation of these decisions of the Board affect the employment and redeployment of many unionized support staff and will best be managed through a forum which allows management and union representatives to consult on these issues. It is also recognized that a significant factor in the redeployment of unionized staff involves the application of collective agreement provisions such as seniority, job postings, bumping and lay-off. These provisions are subject to negotiations and have yet to be determined through the ongoing collective bargaining process.
On April 29, 1998, the Board approved a "Process for Administrative Staff Redeployment, The First Steps - Non-Union Staff". This process includes principles designed to guide fair and consistent implementation of the redeployment process. The following principles are included:
! All employees will be treated in a caring, compassionate and equitable manner throughout the transition. ! The process will include the sharing, with all employees, of timely and directed information regarding as much of the "Total Picture" as possible of the administrative structure, so that employees can make appropriate, knowledgeable decisions about their future.
The "Process for Administrative Staff Redeployment" also outlines how the new structure is to be staffed identifying a process of (a) placement based on qualifications, proficiency and length of service for positions that are essentially similar to previously existing positions and (b) job postings and selection processes for positions which are essentially different from previously existing positions.
The principles and the key features of the Redeployment Process outlined above serve as a context for the work of a Union-Staff Redeployment Committee in discussing redeployment issues as they apply to unionized staff.
536 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
In order to adequately address the scope and complexity of restructuring across the Toronto District School Board, it is recognized that the Committee will require a broad membership that can meet this requirement; it is, therefore, proposed there be six union and six management representatives on the Committee.
Trustee Atkinson, seconded by Trustee Kendall, moved adoption of the following recommendations of the officials:
(a) That the Union-Staff Redeployment Committee be comprised of six union and six management representatives and have as its mandate the following:
(i) Consultation, review and discussion on the issues arising out of the implementation of Board decisions on the restructuring of its central departments; (ii) The process of implementation to be based on the principles and key features of the "Process for Administrative Staff Redeployment" approved by the Board on April 29, 1998, modified, where necessary, to respect negotiated collective agreement provisions.
(b) That the Committee hold an initial meeting no later than December 15, 1998.
The motion was carried.
250. Establishment of Joint Union/Federation/Staff/Student Consultative Committee on Adult and Continuing Education
The Board had for consideration the following staff report, dated October 28, 1998, titled "Establishment of Joint Union/Federation/Staff/Student Consultative Committee on Adult and Continuing Education".
On September 23, 1998, the Board approved the establishment of a Joint Union/Federation/Staff/Student Consultative Committee on Adult and Continuing Education. With the significant number of issues surrounding the restructuring in Adult and Continuing Education consultation on issues of coordination, planning, program delivery and staffing needs will be required. Within this direction it is appropriate that representation be sought from the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation (O.S.S.T.F.) District 12, the Canadian Union of Public Employees (C.U.P.E.), Local 4400 and the Toronto School Administrators’ Association (T.S.A.A.). In addition, representation from the Toronto Adult Student Alliance (T.A.S.A.) would be appropriate.
From a staff perspective, Superintendent Dominic DiFelice and appropriate staff from the Instruction Office involved in the provision of Adult and Continuing Education programs would sit on this Consultative Committee. Appropriate staff from the Human Resources Office would also be utilized. Meetings would occur as needs driven by restructuring in these areas arose. It is anticipated that this Committee would meet at least four times per school year.
Trustee Atkinson, seconded by Trustee Ferreira, moved adoption of the following recommendations of the officials:
(a) That a Joint Union/Federation/Staff/Student Consultative Committee on Adult and Continuing Education be established with the following membership:
537 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Superintendent Dominic DiFelice 1 representative from O.S.S.T.F., District 12 1 representative from C.U.P.E., Local 4400 1 representative from T.A.S.A. 1 representative from T.S.A.A. 2 staff members from the Instruction Office 1 staff member from the Human Resources Office
(b) That the Consultative Committee hold its initial meeting no later than November 30, 1998.
The motion was carried.
251. Good News: TDSB and Students
Trustee Cansfield, seconded by Trustee Stephens, moved: That congratulations of the Board be extended to:
Jimmy Chui, Earl Haig Secondary School, and Adrian Tang, Albert Campbell C.I. who received silver medals at the 39th International Mathematical Olympiad that was held in Taiwan in July. Only six Canadian students competed and the Canadian team ranked 20th among the 76 countries participating.
Glamorgan Jr. P.S., junior students who were awarded the 1998 Ontario Silver Birch Participation Award. This Ontario Library Association award recognizes the highest level of participation in the Toronto area. A group of Glamorgan students attended a luncheon at the St. Lawrence Hall to receive their award.
Mark Whitcombe, Supervisor, Sheldon Centre for Outdoor Education, on receiving the Robin Dennis Award from the Council of Outdoor Educators of Ontario in recognition of his leadership role in outdoor education in Ontario.
Emily Blakidis, grade 6, Claude Watson School for the Arts, on winning the Terry Fox Poster Contest. Emily’s poster will appear in schools across the province.
James Elson, Ariel Garten, Louise Westin, Dara Zarnett, Jen Palmer, Margaret Moll, Jonas Bell-Pasht, Ethan Siller and Claire Zaya, Northern S.S. who will receive the “Have a Heart” award from Lieutenant Governor Hilary Weston. This award recognizes these students and all of Northern’s students who participated in the campaign to raise funds for HIV/AIDS research.
Ted Barnard, Teacher of Mathematics, A.Y. Jackson S.S. who place fifth in the 1998 Edyth Sliffe Award for Distinguished High School Mathematics Teaching. This award, administered by the Mathematics Association of America, recognizes the excellence of those teachers responsible for the success of the highest scoring teams on the annual American High School Mathematics Examination. Only 19 teachers received recognition from all of those nominated from Canada and the United States.
The following students who have received 1997-98 Junior Achievement Awards:
Company of the Year Award and the Highest Return on Investment Award to “MMMMugs” – Team members Daniel Abichandani, Jenny Chan, Russall Goldenberg,
538 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 David Kung, Jennifer Sue, and Craig Tedford from York Mills C.I.; Derrick Fong, Rebecca Goodman, Andrew Liang, Shirley Mukerjea, Stephanie Pasternak, and Andy Shum from Earl Haig S.S.; David Garg, Ruby Garg, Shelly Persaud, and Natasha Rambaran from Martingrove C.I.; and Donald Leung from A.Y. Jackson S.S.
Best Business Plan Award, Best Practice Award, and Best Shareholders Report of the Year Award to “Mystique” – Team members Brian Abichandani, York Mills C.I.; Mike Herman, Western Technical-Commerce School; Albert Ho, Herman Lee, and Joey Lee from Earl Haig S.S.; Phillip Love and Tim Thuss from David and Mary Thompson C.I.; Natasha Thandani, Dr. Norman Bethune C.I.; and Freeman Yu, Agincourt C.I.
Esso Teamwork Award to “Under Pressure” – Team members Allyyah Detoo, Etienne Brule S.S.; Ali Gulamhusein and Donald Leung from A.Y. Jackson S.S.; Khalid Janmohamed, Albert Campbell C.I.; Salimah Shariff, Sir John A. MacDonald C.I.; and Abid Velshi, Earl Haig S.S.
Ritchie Lee, York Mills C.I., who won The Joseph Rotman Entrepreneurial Award; Natasha Thadani, D. Norman Bethune C.I., who won the Leadership in Management Award; Natasha Rambaran, Martingrove C.I., who won the Leadership in Human Resources Award; Nick Maroulis, Forest Hill C.I., who won the Leadership in Quality Award; and Rahim Khalifa, Earl Haig S.S., who won the First Year Achiever of the Year Award.
The motion was carried.
252. Child Care Committee
The Board had for consideration a staff report, dated October 28, 1998, titled "Child Care Committee". The report was provided in response to a request made at the Standing Committee meeting held on October 21, 1998.
Among the matters considered by the Child Care in Schools Task Group was the establishment of a child care committee. The Task Group thought such a committee could provide a means for school-based child care centres, concerned individuals and parents, to connect with the Board for information-sharing and providing advice on child care policy. Four predecessor boards either supported or participated in committee with mandates related to child care or children's services.
The Child Care in Schools Task Group reviewed both the membership and mandate for a new child care committee for the Toronto District School Board. Staff can report to the Board in November 1998 concerning membership categories and a process for determining the membership from those categories. This would permit the committee to hold its first meeting this year, or very early in 1999.
Trustee Atkinson, seconded by Trustee Hall, moved adoption of the following recommendations of the officials:
(a) That the Board establish the Child Care in Schools Advisory Committee as a non- legislated advisory committee, within the procedure adopted by the Board for the organization and operation of such committees;
539 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 (b) That the Child Care in Schools Advisory Committee provide a forum for information-sharing and advice to the Board on policy and related matters concerning child care in schools; and
(c) That the Director of Education report to the Board in November 1998 concerning the membership of the Child Care in Schools Advisory Committee.
The motion was carried.
253. Child Care in Schools Policy - Implementation Procedures and Consultation
The Board had for information a staff report, dated October 27, 1998, and titled "Child Care in Schools Policy - Implementation Procedures and Consultation". The purpose of the report was to propose a process for community consultation on implementation procedures for the Child Care in Schools Policy.
The Child Care in Schools Task Group developed a comprehensive set of recommendations for the implementation of the proposed Child Care in Schools Policy, and proposed a plan for broad-based community consultation.
The Task Group recommended policies and procedures that overlapped with the policy areas of other Task Groups. The Board has considered, and in some cases approved, policy which is addressed in the Child Care Task Group recommendations e.g. Pupil Accommodation Review, and Access to Programs and Optional Attendance Policy etc.
However, there are still several areas in the Child Care in Schools Policy that require the development of more specific and detailed procedures. The recommendations of the Task Group are a useful starting point for this work, and community input on their recommendations would be helpful and informative.
The policy areas established by the Task Group will be used as the framework for further consultation. These are:
School Child Care Coordination Accommodation of Child Care in Schools Access to Services Development and Operation of Child Care Programs Occupancy Agreements School Child Care Admissions Policies Administration Child Care Committee
The Task Group implementation recommendations will be further reviewed to eliminate recommendations for which policy has been established. A document will be prepared in a consolidated format to facilitate community input, and will be distributed to school-based child care centres, schools, and other appropriate organizations in the education and social service sector. The Child Care in Schools Policy and the consultation document will be made available on the TDSB website.
Responses will be analysed and a summary report will be prepared. A progress report will be provided to Trustees by January 1999.
540 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 Trustee Atkinson, seconded by Trustee Schaeffer, moved: That the staff report, dated October 27, 1998, and titled "Child Care in Schools Policy - Implementation Procedures and Consultation" be received.
The motion was carried.
254. Development of Equity Policies for the Toronto District School Board
The Board had for information a staff report, dated October 26, 1998, and titled "Development of Equity Policies for the Toronto District School Board", which was prepared to provide information on the proposed development of equity policies for the Toronto District School Board.
Under the provisions of Bill 104, the Fewer School Boards Act 1997, the Local Education Improvement Committee (LEIC) was established with a structure of nine sub-committees. The LEIC sub-committee reports provided a listing of some of the issues and priorities which required attention in order to harmonize policies and procedures for the Toronto District School Board.
The Equity Sub-Committee of LEIC presented a series of recommendations for consideration. Those recommendations directly related to policy development, and a statement regarding current status of each recommendation, are outlined below:
1. That there be a six-month process to establish and Antiracism and Ethnocultural Equity harmonized policy following the template of Memorandum 199 (B-17:11).
Current Status: Draft of Policy Received by Standing Committee on October 21, 1998.
2. That the racial and ethnocultural harassment focus area be removed from the Antiracism and Ethnocultural Equity Policy and be included in an inclusive Human Rights, Discrimination and Harassment Policy once it is developed (B-17:13).
Current Status: Has been included in the mandate of the Human Rights, Discrimination and Harassment Policy Task Group.
3. That equity policies on other human rights grounds, including gender, sexual orientation, disability and socio-economic status be developed using the structure which is contained in the Antiracism and Ethnocultural Equity Policy (B-16:4)
Current Status: Assigned to Executive Officer Rod Thompson for further action.
4. That based on the consultation process, a new policy on human rights, discrimination and harassment in schools and workplaces be developed for implementation in September 1999 (B-16:6)
Current Status: Human Rights, Discrimination and Harassment School Task Group headed by School Superintendent Natalie Stein is currently meeting. The task group is writing the first draft.
541 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
5. That existing policies and procedures relating to human rights, discrimination and harassment in schools and workplaces remain in effect within the geographic areas covered by each of the original six boards until such time as they are altered by the Toronto District School Board (A-16.8).
Current Status: Ongoing
Trustee Hall, seconded by Trustee Gershon, moved: That the staff report, dated October 26, 1998, and titled "Development of Equity Policies for the Toronto District School Board" be received.
Trustee Blakeley, seconded by trustee Atkinson, moved in amendment: That a draft policy to address issues of bias, harassment, homophobia and gender identity be presented to the Board in December 1998.
The amendment was defeated.
The main motion to receive the report was carried.
255. Report No. 14, Standing Committee, October 14, 1998
Trustee Gershon, seconded by Trustee Kendall, moved: That Report No. 14, Standing Committee, October 14, 1998, be adopted. (Page 555)
The motion was carried.
256. Report No. 15, Standing Committee, October 21, 1998
Trustee Kendall, seconded by Trustee Gershon, moved: That Report No. 15, Standing Committee, October 21, 1998, be adopted. (Page 566)
With respect to Item 4 "Child Care in Schools Draft Policy":
Trustee Ferreira, seconded by Trustee Hall, moved in amendment: That the following text be inserted as an additional point at the end of the first section of the Child Care in Schools Policy: "Access to regulated child care programs is necessary for student parents to achieve their educational goals".
The amendment was carried.
The text of the Child Care in Schools Policy, as amended, is found on page 573.
The motion to adopt Report. No. 15, Standing Committee, October 21, 1998, as amended, was carried.
257. Implementation Plan - Curriculum Development
The Board had for consideration the following staff report, dated October 28, 1998, and titled "Implementation Plan for the Ontario Curriculum". The purpose was to update the Board with regard to implementation activities for The Ontario Curriculum.
542 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 The release of eight documents by the Ministry of Education and Training, which collectively constitute The Ontario Curriculum, has been underway over the past 16 months in the province of Ontario. Generally replacing The Common Curriculum: Policies and Outcomes, Grades 1-9, 1995, these documents now form a core for curriculum renewal in our elementary schools.
Over this period of time the documents have been released in the following sequence:
♦ Language, Grades 1-8 ♦ Mathematics, Grades 1-8 ♦ Science and Technology, Grades 1-8 ♦ The Kindergarten Program, The Arts, Grades 1-8 ♦ French as a Second Language: Core French, Grades 4-8 ♦ Health and Physical Education, Grades 1-8 ♦ Social Studies, Grades 1-6 / History and Geography, Grades 7 and 8
With initial releases occurring toward the end of the 1996-97 school year and the final release occurring in August of 1998, it has been an ambitious renewal of elementary curriculum. Six of the documents have redefined expectations from grades 1 to 8. For the other two documents, the Core French expectations have been extended from grades 4 through 8 and the Kindergarten document is the first Ministry statement defining specific expectations for children’s learning at this level in many years.
Although there are some differences in the structuring of the documents, they are generally consistent in the following areas:
a general introduction setting the context for renewal, defining roles for parents, teachers and students, identification of the key strands of learning for the specific curriculum and an articulation of expectations for exceptional students;
a clear statement regarding expected levels of achievement by students in understanding basic concepts, communicating required knowledge, inquiry and in the application of concepts and skills in the specific curriculum;
A definition of overall and specific expectations, on a grade by grade basis for each of the strands of learning identified in the curriculum documents; and,
a set of explanatory notes which in most documents provides a series of definitions for terms specific to the curriculum.
Each document is intended to provide a rigorous and challenging curriculum which sets out expectations for knowledge and skills, to be achieved by students, on a grade by grade basis.
For the Toronto District School Board, the release of The Ontario Curriculum provides an opportunity for curriculum renewal throughout our elementary panel. As each document has been released, a series of activities have been initiated as follows:
The documents have been distributed to schools and in the education offices so that appropriate staff and school council members will have copies;
upon receipt, teaching staff have begun the implementation cycle by assessing the alignment of expectations in the curriculum documents with their own programs and practices;
543 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
upon receipt in the Education Offices, consultative and coordinating staff for each curriculum area have undertaken a formal analysis to identify gaps between past practices and expectations and an analysis of similarities and differences has been established;
collaborative effort has been undertaken by panels of consultative and coordinating staff for many of the curricular areas to effect an alignment of practice across the Toronto District School Board around the expectations defined in each curriculum document;
consultative and coordinating staff have participated in Ministry of Education and Training train-the-trainer sessions for each document and upon receiving the training have in- serviced other key staff to provide training for those implementing the documents at the school and classroom level to increase their knowledge and understanding;
learning resource materials are being assessed and recommended for purchase as a complement to the new guidelines. This has been more extensive for the first three documents released during the 1997-98 school year and is underway for the recent releases;
sample lessons, units and learning resources are being developed by teams of consultative and coordinating staff along with classroom teachers to provide exemplary support on a grade by grade basis for each of the strands in each curriculum document. As these are developed they will be shared across the Board.
As the curriculum documents have been released sequentially over the past 16 months, the stages of implementation are expectedly different for each area. The commitment of instruction office staff is to work collaboratively with school and education office staff as well as with appropriate staff from other central offices to effect a quality implementation of The Ontario Curriculum which will optimize the achievement for our students.
Curriculum implementation is not an event, it is a process. It is a process which is part of a cycle of review, development and implementation which is ongoing, planned and purposeful in its pursuit of better outcomes for our students. As the Toronto District School Board consolidates the implementation of The Ontario Curriculum and defines the organizational structure that will be in place in the years ahead, the establishment of a representative committee will be required to develop and monitor a comprehensive 3 to 5 year plan for elementary curriculum implementation. The work of this committee would include the following elements:
a “Levels of Implementation” chart outlining 4 levels of implementation in the following areas: Expectations, Learning/Teaching strategies, Remediation/ Enrichment, Assessment/Evaluation, Reporting/Placement, School Organization; (This would be used as a guide, as a monitoring accountability document for individual teachers, schools and the Board.)
a plan to develop detailed curriculum over time that would provide teachers with classroom ready materials (expectation, teaching and learning strategies, assessment and evaluation, remediation and enrichment strategies);
the opportunity to include and emphasize equity and diversity issues, ESL and Special Ed considerations, Information Technology and Safe Schools through collaboration with the Student and Community Services Office;
a plan to incorporate exemplary teaching strategies in this implementation;
544 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
an outline of staff development opportunities for administrators and teachers developed cooperatively with the Human Resources Office;
a communication plan involving the Communications Department that would keep all key partners up to date (administrators, teachers, parents, trustees and the community at large);
the Academic Accountability Office and its research staff will be involved from the start in planning, monitoring and review of progress of the review, development and implementation process;
conduct a gap analysis to determine what materials and resources presently in use in the TDSB can be used, what might be adapted and what new materials may be required;
realign and reorganize present materials and resources to fit the new curriculum documents; and,
introduce or reinforce school level planning to manage the implementation at the school level.
A full set of The Ontario Curriculum was provided as a complete resource for each Board member.
Trustee Hall, seconded by Trustee Codd moved: That the staff report titled "Implementation Plan for the Ontario Curriculum" be received.
The motion was carried.
258. Secondary School Reform
The Board had for consideration the following staff report, dated October 28, 1998, titled "Secondary School Reform". The purpose of the report was to update the Board with regard to initiatives surrounding the reform of secondary school education.
The release of the guideline that will form policy in the Province of Ontario, for secondary school education is anticipated prior to the end of this month. This document, Ontario Secondary Schools, 1998, along with the secondary curricula and support documents will form the core of secondary programs as we move into the new millennium.
Many components of this reform initiative will need to be addressed as we move through the upcoming months (A summary of these elements accompanied this report). To ensure that the students, staff, parents and communities are informed throughout the implementation, a project team has been established with Superintendent Robin Shepherd chairing. The mandate of this team will be to ensure that communications around Secondary Reform initiatives are comprehensive and timely as we move toward the September, 1999 implementation date.
Trustee Cansfield, seconded by Trustee Laskin moved: That the staff report titled "Secondary School Reform" be received.
The motion was carried.
545 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
259. Parent Safety Program - Notice of Motion
The Board considered the following notice of motion from Trustee Kendall, dated October 16, 1998, regarding the Parent Safety Program.
Trustee Kendall, seconded by Trustee McNaughton, moved:
Be it resolved that the Board endorse the Parent Safety Program; and
That the Board work in cooperation with other partners of the Parent Safety Program to expand the program into other Toronto neighbourhoods to enhance safety in and around its schools; and
That staff report back with recommendations on what level of staff, resource, training or other support would be appropriate for the Board to supply to the Parent Safety Program.
The motion was carried.
260. Inquiries to Staff from Ministry of Education and Training
The Board considered the following notice of motion from Trustee Ward, dated October 16, 1998, regarding the referral of requests from the Ministry of Education and Training to the appropriate superintendent.
Trustee Ward, seconded by Trustee Ferreira, moved: That, where inquiries are received from the Ministry of Education by staff below the level of Superintendent, and where inquiries deal with statistical data, the operation of any school or school program, or the performance of a staff member, such requests be referred to the appropriate Superintendent.
The motion was carried.
261. Discussion of Federated Staffing Matters in Public Session
The Board considered the following notice of motion from Trustee Payne regarding the discussion of federated staffing matters in public session.
Trustee Payne, seconded by Trustee Hill, moved:
WHEREAS, the Province of Ontario has taken complete control over the staffing of the Board’ s School, and
WHEREAS, the Board has removed all staffing from negotiations with the teacher federations, and
WHEREAS, parents are concerned about the staffing levels as it effects: • Class size • Librarians • Guidance • Teacher and assistants • Other federated support staff,
546 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Therefore be it resolved, That the Toronto District School Board henceforth discuss all federated staffing matters in public session.
The motion was defeated.
262. Report No. 8, Chair's Committee, October 5, 1998
Trustee Hall, seconded by Trustee Kendall, moved: That Report No. 8, Chair's Committee, October 5, 1998, be adopted. (see Page 578)
The motion was carried.
263. Report No. 9, Chair's Committee, October 26, 1998
Trustee Kendall, seconded by Trustee Gershon, moved: That Report No. 9, Chair's Committee, October 26, 1998, be adopted. (see Page 580)
The motion was carried.
264. Report No. 6, Special Education Advisory Committee (S.E.A.C.), October 8, 1998
Trustee Hall, seconded by Trustee Schaeffer, moved: That Report No. 6, Special Education Advisory Committee, October 8, 1998, be adopted. (see Page 583)
The motion was carried.
265. Consideration of Notice of Motion
The Board considered the following motion by Trustee Nyberg regarding Government School Closure Committees.
Trustee Nyberg, seconded by Trustee Laskin, moved:
WHEREAS, the provincial funding model has necessitated the setting up of committees to review schools in the Toronto District School Board for closure and the Board has decided to establish 21 Area Reviews,
Therefore be it resolved, That the committees be named the Provincial Government School Closure Committees.
The motion was defeated on a recorded vote, as follows: YEAS - Trustees Blakeley, Ferreira, Hill, Laskin, Mankovsky, Payne, Schaeffer, Thomas and Ward (9); NAYS - Trustees Atkinson, Cansfield, Cleary, Codd, Gershon, Hall, Kendall, McNaughton, Moll, Nash, Nyberg and Stephens (12); ABSENT - Trustee Moyer (1).
266. Extension of Board Meeting
The Board had not completed its business by 11:00 p.m. and the ending time procedure was applied.
A motion to adjourn was defeated.
547 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Trustee Laskin, seconded by Trustee Schaeffer, moved: That the Board meeting be extended for up to one hour.
The motion was carried by a majority of all members of the Board.
267. Motion to Re-convene to Committee of the Whole (Private Session)
Trustee Blakeley, seconded by Trustee Laskin, moved: That the Board re-convene to Committee of the Whole (Private Session) to continue consideration of private matters.
The motion was carried.
268. Report No. 18, Committee of the Whole (Private Session), October 28, 1998
Trustee Hall, seconded by Trustee Ferreira, moved: That Report No. 18, Committee of the Whole (Private Session), October 28, 1998, be adopted. Page 586.
The motion was carried.
269. Adjournment Trustee Ferreira, seconded by Trustee McNaughton, moved: That the Board stand adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
The motion was carried.
Marguerite Jackson Gail Nyberg Director of Education and Secretary-Treasurer Chair of the Board
548 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
INTERIM PROCEDURE FOR THE SELECTION, PROMOTION AND PLACEMENT PROCEDURE FOR PRINCIPALS AND VICE-PRINCIPALS Adopted (See Page 535)
A. THE SELECTION PROCEDURE
Selection Process Team
1. A team of supervisory officers, with a principals' representative, named by the Toronto School Administrators’ Association, will be responsible for managing the principal/vice- principal selection and promotion procedure. The Selection Process Team will:
(a) Establish a Design Team of principals, vice-principals and supervisory officers responsible for the development of:
• an assessment tool to help candidates, their principals and school superintendents determine the candidate's readiness to assume the school administrative leadership role. This assessment tool will not be ready until the 1999-2000 school year and will be developed in consultation with principals, vice-principals and supervisory officers. For the 1998-99 school year, the Resume Highlights Form will focus the discussion on the candidate's readiness.
• the activities described in Step 1: The Pre-Interview Process.
(b) Determine the number of teams required to administer the Pre-Interview Process.
(c) Analyze the needs of the system for school administrators and recommend, to the Director and the Executive Officer - Human Resources, the number of candidates who will proceed to the formal interview stage.
(d) Ensure that feedback is provided to all candidates who request it.
2. For the 1998-99 school year process, the Selection Process Team will be enlarged because of its task in the continuing consultation process. A principal (preferably secondary, since an elementary principal is already a member of the project team) and two vice-principals, one from each panel (all to be named by the Toronto School Administrators’ Association) will be added to the Team. The Team will monitor the process, provide opportunities for feedback on the interim procedure once it is completed and continue the consultation process that will lead to the recommendations about the finalized procedure that will commence in September 1999.
The Application Process
1. An information session will be held at several sites across the Toronto District School Board for information on the interim procedure for potential candidates.
549 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
2. The ad will be posted in schools and work locations across the Toronto District School Board. The Director and Executive Officer - Human Resources will give direction as to whether the ad will be posted internally only or internally and externally.
3. Candidates will be required to complete a School Principal/School Vice-Principal Application Form and a Resume Highlights Form. These forms will be available on disk in each Education Office.
(a) Internal Candidates
• The candidate, principal and school superintendent will review the material on the Resume Highlights Form to help determine whether or not the candidate is ready for the position at this time. A previous principal and/or previous supervisory officer may be consulted if the candidate is not well known to the current principal and supervisory officer.
• A joint decision will be made by the principal and supervisory officer on the candidate's readiness to apply. The candidate will be assessed as follows:
→ "The candidate is ready to apply". The candidate will then proceed to step 1.
→ "The candidate is not yet ready to apply". The principal and school superintendent will provide specific feedback to the candidate and will make recommendations, to support the candidate's professional growth. Candidates deemed "not yet ready" will have their applications withdrawn at this point in the process.
• For 1998-1999, the criteria for this decision will be based on the breadth and depth of the candidate's track record, as indicated on the Resume Highlights Form and in the discussion. The use of an assessment tool next year will help ensure clearer guidelines for the future.
(b) External Candidates
If external candidates are invited to apply:
• Candidates will be asked to name four referees: their principal, a supervisory officer, a teacher colleague and a support staff colleague.
• A Toronto District School Board principal and a school supervisory officer will contact the referees with a set series of questions, developed by the Design Team.
• External candidates, evaluated by a Toronto District School Board principal and supervisory officer as "ready to apply", will undergo Steps 1 and 2, along with the internal candidates.
550 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Step 1: The Pre-Interview Process
1. A Design Team, composed of six supervisory officers and six principals, will be established. Two vice-principals, who will not be applying for principal in the year that they sit on the Design Team and who are not on the Promotion List, will also be on the Design Team. These eight school administrators will be named by the Toronto School Administrators’ Association.
The members of the Design Team will work together, to ensure consistency and appropriateness of the process.
2. (a) The Design Team will:
• design the format for the pre-interview process, to include both problem solving activities and the sharing of actual implementation experiences.
• determine the evaluation standards and the rubrics for the ranking of "ready for the next step" and "not ready for the next step".
• provide training for the short-listing teams.
• prepare detailed information sessions for candidates on the specifics of the process (e.g. one-on-one versus groups; oral versus written; spontaneous versus prepared) and the criteria for success.
• establish questions for referees for external candidates, if external applications are to be accepted.
(b) For the final procedure (to be implemented in 1999/2000), it is anticipated that portfolios might comprise a major component of the Pre-Interview Process. If that decision is made, potential candidates will receive both notice, well in advance, and in-service on how to create such portfolios.
3. On a set day, all candidates at this step will participate in the process. One day will be set for elementary candidates, another for secondary candidates. Depending on the number of candidates, it may be necessary to schedule vice-principal candidates on one day and principal candidates on another day, by panel.
4. The pre-interview teams, composed of principals, named by the Toronto School Administrators’ Association, and supervisory officers will:
• evaluate the responses to the problem-solving activities and the sharing of actual implementation experiences in accordance with the rubrics and evaluation standards set by the Design Team.
• ensure that the evaluation weighting of the problem solving activities and the sharing of actual implementation experiences will be equal for these two components.
• complete feedback forms for candidates, including recommendations for growth.
551 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
• evaluate the candidates as either "ready for the next step" or "not ready for the next step", in accordance with the criteria set by the Design Team.
5. All candidates will be informed as to whether or not they are proceeding to the next stage. Candidates who are not proceeding will be provided with feedback, at their request.
Step 2: The Interview Process
1. Information sessions will be held for candidates at this step, to review the interview process and protocols in the Toronto District School Board.
2. Formal interviews will be held to create a list of candidates deemed ready for promotion.
3. Specific information regarding the interviews (e.g. length of interview, time for an opening/closing statement) will be provided to all candidates. (Please note: the interview process will take place in the 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 school years. Whether the interview process will continue after that as an annual or every second year process, will be determined once the final procedure has been designed and approved.)
4. The interview teams will be provided with training, to review the interview process and protocols in the Toronto District School Board.
5. Interview teams:
• Interview teams for vice-principals will be composed of supervisory officers, a trustee and a principal, with the principal to be named by the Toronto School Administrators’ Association.
• Interview teams for principals will be composed of supervisory officers, with a trustee and a principal, named by the Toronto School Administrators’ Association on the team.
• If there is a large number of candidates for a particular strand, more than one team may be created.
• Members of teams will be selected so that they will not be interviewing candidates from their own areas with the exception of the trustee. Where possible, trustees will interview candidates from their own areas.
6. All interviews for the same strands will be scheduled to take place on the same day.
B. THE PROMOTION LIST
1. Candidates will be informed as to whether or not they are on the Promotion List. Candidates will be placed on the List; they will not be ranked. Unsuccessful candidates may request feedback.
2. Candidates will remain on the Promotion List for 3 years. If candidates are not appointed in that time period, they will have to re-apply. Although this is an interim
552 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
procedure, candidates who are successfully placed on the Promotion List this year, will remain on the List for three years.
3. The Board approves all appointments to principal and vice-principal.
C. THE TRANSFER AND PLACEMENT PROCESS
1. Principal Profiles, Vice-Principal Profiles and School Profiles:
• Each fall, the School Council will facilitate a meeting whereby parents in the school will, if they so choose, develop or update a Principal profile, a Vice- Principal profile, and a list of the skills and abilities desired in these administrators to be used as part of the criteria in selecting administrators for the school should a vacancy occur during the school year. At this meeting, a parent representative will be selected to be involved further in the process.
• Each principal will develop or update a School Profile, a description of the school's program and important school/community information for potential school administrators.
• Trustees will be consulted about these Profiles and their input solicited. Trustees may choose to facilitate and attend the profile setting meetings.
• In secondary schools, students, through their student council, will be asked to develop a Principal and/or Vice-Principal profile.
• School staffs will also submit a Principal Profile and Vice-Principal Profile.
• The Profiles will be forwarded to the appropriate Executive Officer through the School Superintendent, by December 31st.
2. Each fall, School Superintendents will discuss with their principals, vice-principals and candidates on the Promotion List, their career plans and preferences regarding transfer/placement.
3. When most openings are known, the Executive Officer, Human Resources, will convene meetings of School Superintendents to draft plans for transfers and placements. These draft plans will:
Involve consultation with the trustee(s) in whose ward(s) the affected schools are located as well as with the parent representative at the school where the vacancy occurs. Consultation with the trustee(s) and with the parent representative will take place prior to the completion of the draft plans for transfers and placements.
• take into account the Profiles, identified needs across the system and the career plans and transfer/placement requests from the school administrators and those on the Promotion List.
• involve consultation, in confidence, with individuals affected by the draft plan. Principals will be consulted about the vice-principal member(s) of their school
553 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
teams; vice-principals will be consulted about the principals with whom they will be working.
• Principals, vice-principals and candidates on the promotion list may, if they so wish, indicate a general geographic preference or a preference for a school community with particular characteristics. This information will be taken into account in formulating the draft plan.
4. The Director and Executive Council will have input into the draft transfer and placement plans.
5. Promotions will be communicated to the candidates on the Thursday immediately following the Board meeting at which the appointments are approved. Communications to the system will be made on the Friday immediately following that Board meeting.
D. HUMAN RIGHTS, ANTIRACISM AND ETHNOCULTURAL EQUITY ISSUES
Staff who have a range of experience in human rights, antiracism and ethnocultural equity issues will be involved in each step of the Interim Selection, Promotion and Placement Procedure to ensure a fair and bias free process, and to assist trustees, supervisory officers and principals involved in the administration of the procedure.
****************************************
554 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
REPORT NO. 14, STANDING COMMITTEE
(Public Session)
October 14, 1998
To the Chair and Members of The Toronto District School Board
The Standing Committee of the Toronto District School Board convened at 7:15 p.m. on October 14, 1998, in the Board Room at 155 College Street, Toronto, Ontario, with Co-Chair Gerri Gershon presiding.
The following members were present: Trustees Irene Atkinson, Donna Cansfield, Diane Cleary, Judi Codd, Christine Ferreira, Gerri Gershon, Suzan Hall, Elizabeth Hill, Jeff Kendall, Shelley Laskin, Sheine Mankovsky, Ron McNaughton, Barbara Nash, Gail Nyberg, Lilein Schaeffer, Doug Stephens, Mike Thomas and Sheila Ward.
Regrets were received from Trustees Brian Blakeley, David Moll and Stephnie Payne.
1. Declarations of Possible Conflicts of Interest
Trustee Moyer declared possible conflicts of interest with regard to the items on the “Resolution for Banking Arrangements and Signing Authorities for the Toronto District School Board” and a “Request for Proposal – Banking Services”. She stated that the nature of her interest is that she is an employee of the Toronto Dominion Bank. Trustee Moyer did not take part in the discussion or vote on these items.
Trustee Ward declared a possible conflict of interest with regard to the item on a Request for Proposal – Banking Services. She stated that the general nature of her interest is that she is an employee of the Bank of Montreal. Trustee Ward did not take part in the discussion or vote on this item.
2. Delegation: The Metro Toronto Region of the Ontario Secondary School Students Association re Student Initiatives
The Standing Committee heard a delegation from Emily Austin, Regional President of the Metro Toronto Region of the Ontario Secondary School Students Association, and Alison Prime, a member of the Board of Directors, concerning the functions and objectives of the Association.
3. Resolution for Banking Arrangement and Signing Authorities for the Toronto District School Board
The Standing Committee had before it a report recommending approval of a Resolution regarding banking arrangements and signing authorities for the Toronto District School Board.
The report advised that at its meeting on December 17, 1997, the School Board approved a resolution for interim banking arrangements and signing authorities.
555 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Although the appointment of one bank for the School Board will not be done until January 1999, it is necessary to appoint new signing officers given the retirement of several former signing officers and the appointment of the Executive Officers.
Accordingly, the Resolution provides for the designation of signing officers and amends the language and reference in the existing resolution to the former Area Boards. The Resolution has been reviewed and endorsed by Legal counsel, Brian Kelsey.
The Resolution, in Point 1, enables the Director and Secretary Treasurer to designate other person(s) for specific purposes. For example, she would designate the Finance Official for each location to deal with specific banking arrangements and certain Executive Council members and specific senior staff to sign particular types of agreements such as construction/supplier contracts or leases.
Following adoption of the Resolution, the cheque-signing plates of all locations would be replaced with new plates showing the Director and the Executive Officer, Business Services.
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that the banking arrangements and designated signing officers as defined in the Resolution (see page 563) be approved and adopted by the School Board.
4. Request for Proposal – Banking Services
The Standing Committee considered a report advising that the Request for Proposal – Banking Services has been approved by Executive Council for issuance to prospective bidders on October 16, 1998.
The report further advised that part of the process of combining the business services of the seven locations include consolidating the existing multiple banking arrangements. A Request for Proposal (RFP) has been reviewed and approved by Executive Council for the selection of one bank to provide the banking services requirements for the Toronto District School Board. The RFP proposes a three-year appointment renewable at the option of the School Board.
The selection committee will be comprised of the Comptrollers of Business Services under the direction of the Executive Officer – Business Services. The services of a consultant with expertise in the banking business will be engaged to assist the selection committee in the understanding and evaluation of the responses. Given the existing demands on the Comptrollers at this time, the assistance will facilitate and expedite the selection process.
The plan calls for a recommendation to be presented to Executive Council on December 1, 1998 in order to have a recommendation before the Standing Committee meeting of December 9, 1998.
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that this report be received.
5. Transportation Policy Update
The Standing Committee considered a report providing a preliminary update on action to date regarding the Board motion of June 24, 1998, concerning the implementation and impact of the new transportation policy.
The report advised that during the past month, staff began consultations with the community concerning transportation issues that have an impact on numerous school-related activities. For
556 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 example, the new transportation policy would change student busing from home to school routes for optional programs, to school-to-school pickups and deliveries. As such, more parents would be required to send or deliver their children to the designated home school. This procedure has been in practice in many areas of the city already and has worked satisfactorily. In cases where there are safety hazards for students, special busing arrangements have been allowed. This practice will continue where unsafe conditions prevail.
The strategies/initiatives outlined below are being pursued in order to address issues that will arise:
(i) A survey has been designed and will be forwarded to parents. It requests the extend to which the type of busing service will have an impact on their decisions to send their children to optional programs. The survey is also to be available on our Web Site and it is expected that Research staff will have the responses analyzed for Trustee use by November.
(ii) Although, it is the parents’ responsibility for their children before and after school delivery, appropriate school staff will be advised that if their school is a pickup and delivery point, every effort is to be made to ensure that students are monitored.
(iii) Officials at the TTC have been contacted and advised that due to reductions in Board busing, the city buses will need to accommodate more students. The TTC was receptive to our concerns, however, they do not expect to run more buses. The suggestion was made by the TTC that school dismissal times be staggered to allow for less crowded buses.
(iv) A list of required crossing guards has been prepared in anticipation of cancelled buses. This information will be forwarded to city officials for consideration.
(v) Arrangements have been made to include the new transportation policy on the Board’s Web Site before November. Web Site visitors are encouraged to respond to issues of concern.
(vi) Since some parents are not familiar with the school-to-school transportation practice, they are being notified by way of a memo, to invite discussion with other School Councils in areas of the city, who have found the practice satisfactory.
(vii) It has been suggested that school hours be staggered so that an extra run can take place with contracted and owned buses. School superintendents will need to discuss school hours with Principals in affected schools and ensure that consultation takes place with School Councils and affected students and parents. Discussion is also being undertaken with our coterminous board, to determine the possible cost savings of co- ordinated bus runs.
It is expected that all issues that will arise due to the new transportation policy will be able to be addressed. A final report will be presented to the Board in November 1998 outlining details of the consultation process referred to above. Consultation efforts are being undertaken by the Transportation Officers with affected parties and are focused at assessing the impact of the new transportation policy and possible action, to minimize the impact of changes.
Following lengthy discussion in which concerns were expressed about several issues contained in the report, the Standing Committee concurred that items (ii) and (vii) be amended, as was recommended.
557 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that the report be received.
6. Direct Purchase of Natural Gas The Standing Committee considered a report outlining a natural gas purchasing strategy and tendering process designed to protect the School Board from energy price inflation for the two- year period commencing November 1, 999.
The report indicated that in 1986 the Government of Canada and the Province of Ontario deregulated natural gas, allowing users to make direct purchases of natural gas. Since, November 1, 1987 the Federation of Public School Boards in Toronto has undertaken direct purchase agreements with three different natural gas marketing suppliers. Four public tenders have been called over the period to obtain competitive pricing in the purchase of natural gas. For the period 1994 to 1997, natural gas was purchased from Direct Energy marketing Inc. Since November 1997, natural gas has been purchased from ProGas Limited. This latter natural gas supply contract expires October 31, 1999.
Under direct purchase arrangements natural gas is purchased as a future commodity using a strategy to exploit low current prices at a time when market fundamentals indicate higher future prices. The ratio between natural gas supply in western Canada and natural gas demand in North America along with other economic factors influence the market fundamentals for natural gas. In Alberta, demand for natural gas is now approximately 85-90% of supply and exports to the United States are projected to increase demand substantially as new pipeline capacity is introduced in December 1998 and 1999. These new pipeline projects from western Canada will put pressure on natural gas reserves and also equalize Alberta prices with United States prices, which are now much higher. I n order to reduce this price inflation risk the Board can purchase a portion of the required natural gas now and then continue to monitor future natural gas prices and purchase additional volumes on future price weaknesses.
Since 1994 and up until 1997 the quantity of natural gas required by the Board had increased by about 5%. This increase over the period is because 77 facilities had been switched to natural gas in place of another heating fuel. In addition, all new facility space added over the period uses natural gas as a heating fuel. Conversions to natural gas include 33 schools from electricity to natural gas in 1994 (SEF), 19 schools in 1995, 11 schools in 1996, and 14 schools in 1997/98. Total natural gas expenditures in 1997 were $15.3 million. Of this total approximately $3 million constitute transportation costs from western Canada, $5.2 million Consumers Gas distribution costs, and $7.1 million commodity costs. Natural gas consumption decreased by 24% over the first nine months of 1998. This decrease is due to the unusually warm weather plus energy conservation initiatives.
Performance of Recent Agreements
Throughout 1995 and 1996 up until November 1997 the savings from the direct purchase of natural gas were a fixed percentage of the cost of natural gas delivered each month. This resulted in savings levels of $155,176 and $163,939 for 1995 and 1996 respectively. Savings under this arrangement for the first 10 months of 1997 or up until November 1997 resulted in similar savings, $136,000.
In November 1997 pricing was switched from this fixed percentage savings per month based on the Consumers Gas cost of natural gas to that of a mixture of indexed and fixed pricing which is based on Alberta commodity market indexes. Under this arrangement, savings are realized
558 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 when natural gas as a commodity is purchased at a price below that $1,000,000 of the regulated rate charged for natural gas by Consumers Gas. Savings
In a report to the Board dated $750,000 August 26, 1997, the savings for the period November 1997 to October 1998 were projected to be $500,000 $450,000. Actual savings for the first 9 months of this period ending August 31 are $614,000. Additional $250,000 savings per month this year are projected at $145,000, $110,00, and $80,000 for the months August, September and October respectively. Total $0 savings over the year should be over 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 $950,000. Consumers Gas increased regulated rates effective May 1, 1998. Protection from this rate increase generated the additional savings for the Board. Due to advanced natural gas purchases, savings are expected to be at or above the $800,000 level for the period November 1998 to October 1999. Consumers Gas is predicting an additional 3% rate increase in regulated rates for 1999. Protection from this rate increase will provide additional savings.
Table 1 below shows the actual natural gas cost savings in the years 1995 though to the end of August 1998. Projections are shown for the remainder of 1998 and the year 1999.
Table 1
Year Savings
1995 $155,176
1996 $163,935
1997 $360,558
1998 $950,000
1999 $800,000
Restructuring the natural gas agreements with Consumers Gas, implementing a disciplined and patient natural gas purchase strategy based on competitively tendered natural gas supplies, and purchasing natural gas early in a rising market have lead to the increase in annual savings shown in the chart. Natural gas pricing has been a mixture of indexed and fixed pricing which is based on Alberta commodity market indexes.
Proposal
A purchase strategy based upon supply and demand forecasts, along with the seasonal effects of natural gas pricing and usage, has been developed with ECNG Inc., the Board’s consultant in such matters. The strategy calls for the following mixture of indexed and fixed pricing:
559 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Time Period Volume Price
November 1999 to March 2000 25% Fixed price at time of acceptance of tender
75% Floating index prices until natural gas can be purchased on a fixed price basis below $2.52/GJ
April 2000 to October 2000 100% Floating index prices until natural gas can be purchased on a fixed price basis below $2.05/GJ
November 2000 to October 2001 35% Fixed price at time of acceptance of tender.
65% Floating index prices until natural gas can be purchased on a fixed price basis below $2.20/GJ
The strategy also calls for the issue of a request for proposal to all qualified natural gas suppliers by the Purchasing and Distribution Services and the Energy Program staff of the TDSB. Staff along with the Board’s consultant shall evaluate proposals received at or before the deadline. Evaluation of the proposals will be based upon the following criteria:
1. The extent to which the Proponent has complied with the requirements set out in the RFP;
2. Lowest price or combination of offerings which gives greatest value to the TDSB;
3. The Proponent's reliability of supply;
4. Capabilities, understanding of the requirements, integrity, reliability, and financial stability of the Proponent;
5. Environmental responsibility; and
6. Absence of both conflicts of interest and potential conflicts of interest.
Approval Authority
Natural gas pricing is based upon indexed commodity pricing mechanisms. These commodity indexes change minute by minute throughout each day. Therefore, proponent responses from a request for proposal issued by the Board for natural gas is expected to be extremely time sensitive. It is normal practice that competitive proponent responses will place a four-hour time limit on proposal acceptance by the Board. This short acceptance period will not allow for proposals to be approved by the Board as required under the Board’s purchasing policy and levels of authority procedures, approved by the Board on September 9, 1998. Therefore, as part of the purchase strategy for natural gas, it is proposed that the Board give authority to the Director to accept on behalf of the Board the natural gas proposal that provides the best value to the Board. The value of this proposal will be approximately $7 million for each of the two years.
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that:
(a) this report be received;
560 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
(b) the Board approve the purchasing strategy for the direct purchase of natural gas as outlined in the report for the two-year period starting November 1999; and
(c) the Purchasing and Distribution Services in consultation with the Energy Program staff of the TDSB issue a request for proposals to qualified natural gas suppliers in order to obtain natural gas for the two-year period starting November 1999.
7. Written Notices of Motions
The Standing Committee reports having received a written Notice of Motion from:
(a) Trustee Codd with respect to the availability of insurance coverage to school councils (b) Trustee Thomas with respect to the establishment of a process for students to provide assistance to Trustees.
8. Reports from Board Representatives on Other Organizations
The Standing Committee heard information indicated below from School Board representatives on other organizations:
(a) Ontario Public School Board’s Association (OPSBA)
(i) From Trustee Hall, giving an update on the issues addressed at the most recent meeting of OPSBA’s Board of Directors.
(ii) From Trustee Gershon, advising that OPSBA will be holding a regional meeting in Barrie, Ontario, on Friday, October 16, 1998. Trustees were invited to attend.
(b) City of Toronto Board of Health
From Trustee Gershon on her and Trustee Hill’s attendance at the most recent meeting of the City of Toronto Board of Health. The Committee was informed that the Board of Health is currently being re-organized and effective May 1999, Council representation will be reduced by one and one elected school board representative for both public and private schools will be added to the membership, such representation to be chosen by City Council. Also, a sub-committee will be established to address issues affecting children. Staff undertook to review placing a TDSB staff representative on this committee.
(c) Ad Hoc Parent and Community Reference Group
From Trustee Laskin on the activities and on-going work of the Ad Hoc Parent and Community Reference Group.
(d) E.I.C. Meeting
From Trustee Laskin on her and Trustee Gershon’s report to the most recent E.I.C. consultation on the “Future Role of School Councils”.
561 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
9. New Business
The Standing Committee considered the following additional matters:
(a) Parental Involvement on School Staffing and Selection Committees
Staff undertook to review this matter and report back to the Committee.
(b) Realignment of the Students’ Super Council
Concerns regarding the application process associated with the realignment of the Students’ Super Council and the election of officers for 1998-1999 at the upcoming conference. Staff undertook to involve a staff advisor in the process.
(c) Distribution of the Budget Impact Document
The Director of Education advised that the document will be forwarded to the Trustees on Friday, October 16, 1998.
(d) The Canadian Aboriginal Festival
An oral report from Trustee Nyberg regarding the Education Day of the Canadian Aboriginal Festival which is being co-sponsored by the Ontario Teachers’ Federation (OTF) and the Toronto Star on Friday, November 20, 1998 at the Toronto SkyDome (a copy of the communication from the OTF to Trustee Nyberg regarding this matter was made available to Trustees). The OTF is requesting that the Board either endorse or support the event at no cost to the Board.
Staff undertook to determine whether the Education Day component of the initiative could be supported by the School Board.
(e) Erasable Textbooks
An oral report from Trustee Nyberg about her recent discovery that the words were erasable in some of the textbooks in the TDSB, purchased through the recent Ministry of Education and Training textbook program. The extent of the problem is not known at this point in time.
The Director of Education advised that staff will work through the supervisory officers of the schools to determine the quality of the textbooks across the system, and take appropriate action on this matter.
10. Adjournment
The Standing Committee (Public Session) adjourned at 8:25 p.m. and convened in Private Session following a brief recess. Respectfully submitted,
Gerri Gershon Co-Chair of Standing Committee Adopted, October 28, 1998
562 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
RESOLUTION - BANKING ARRANGEMENT AND SIGNING AUTHORITIES FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (Adopted, see Page 556)
RESOLUTION of the Toronto District School Board (the “Board”) at a meeting thereof duly called and held on the 28th day of October, 1998.
WHEREAS it is necessary to provide authority to Designated Officers of the Toronto District School Board to:
(a) sign cheques and carry on the business of banking for and on behalf of the Board;
(b) borrow on a temporary basis moneys to meet the current expenditure of the Board; and,
(c) execute documents on behalf of the Board;
MOVED by Gerri Gershon, member, seconded by Jeff Kendall, member, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. Designated Signing Officers
The Director and Secretary-Treasurer and the Executive Officer, Business Services or the person(s) designated in writing for specific purposes by the Director and Secretary- Treasurer are the Designated Signing Officers of the Board and shall be so described in every document referred to in this Resolution which they sign or execute pursuant to the authorities hereby conferred.
2. Authority of Designated Signing Officers
The Designated Signing Officers are hereby authorized: a. To draw, accept, sign, make, endorse, negotiate and dispose of all or any bills of exchange, promissory notes, cheques, orders for the payment of money and electronic transfers; b. To pay and receive all moneys and give releases for the same; c. To receive from the Bank any negotiable instruments or other property and assets of the organization of every kind and give receipts therefore; d. To execute any agreement with or authority to the Bank relating to the banking business of the organization, either generally or with regard to any particular transaction; e. To transact generally with the Bank any business he/she may see fit; f. To deposit with or transfer to the said Bank (but for credit of the account of the organization only) all or any bills of exchange, promissory notes, cheques or orders for the payment of money and cheques or orders for the payment of money and other negotiable instruments and for the said purpose to endorse the same or any of them; and, g. To receive all paid cheques and other debt vouchers charged to any account of the organization and give receipts therefore.
563 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
h. To provide to the Bank or any officer thereof authority to accept and/or pay any and all drafts, bills of exchanges or promissory notes on behalf of the Location of the Board to which their authority relates. i. To sign any agreement with or authority to the Bank or any of its subsidiaries relating to the Board’s banking and financial services needs, whether general or with regard to any particular transaction (including, among other things, (i) the Account Operation Agreement; (ii) interest rate, foreign exchange and commodity-related banking arrangements, and (iii) the Bank’s service agreements for centralized cash control, third party payments, electronic data interchange, money market trader and any other of the Bank’s cash management services). j. To sign and execute all contracts, agreements, deeds, leases and all other instruments in writing; provided that such documents and instruments required by law to be executed under seal shall first be authorized by Resolution of the Board, and there shall be endorsed thereon referenced to the Minutes of the Board authorizing execution thereof, together with the approval by the Board’s solicitor of the form of the documents. 3. Authorization
The signatures of each Designated Signing Officer may be printed, mechanically imprinted or electronically imprinted on all cheques, drafts, orders for payment, electronic transfers and lists of payment by electronic transfer.
The endorsement of the Board on any item deposited to an Account may be made by means of a rubber stamp or any other device.
In this Resolution, the phrase “Account” means each and every account of the Board maintained with the Bank.
The Bank may rely on everything that is done and on all documents signed on the Board’s behalf in accordance with this Resolution. All such documents will be valid and binding upon the Board whether or not the Board’s corporate seal has been placed on any such document.
The Board will provide the Bank with a certified true copy of this Resolution and a list of the names of all individuals authorized to act in accordance with this Resolution, as well as specimens of their signatures.
Each office and branch of the Bank may act in accordance with those documents and this Resolution until due written notice has been given to and received by a responsible Bank officer.
4. The Bank
The Board appoints as the bank of each Location of the Board, the following:
LOCATION BANK 840 Coxwell Avenue Royal Bank of Canada 1 Civic Centre Court Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce 5050 Yonge Street Bank of Nova Scotia 140 Borough Drive Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce 155 College Street Toronto Dominion Bank 2 Trethewey Drive Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce 45 York Mill Road Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
564 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Every reference herein to “the Bank” means each bank of the Toronto District School Board at each Location on the date of this Resolution.
5. Short Term Borrowing
The Designated Signing Officers designated by the Director and Secretary-Treasurer have the authority to borrow money by way of overdraft arising from the fluctuation in the daily amount required by the Bank for each Location to meet the payments of the said Location, provided that the Bank will notify the Board of the overdraft during the first business day following the day in which an overdraft occurs.
The Director and Secretary-Treasurer and the Chair or Vice Chair or person(s) designated in writing by them are authorized to borrow from the Bank from time to time the sums that the Board considers necessary to meet the current expenditures of the Board until the current revenue has been received, including the sums that the Board considers necessary to meet debt charges payable until the current revenue has been received.
The amounts that the Board may borrow at any one time for the purposes mentioned in the preceding paragraph, together with the total of any similar borrowings that have not been repaid and any accrued interest on those borrowings, shall not exceed the unreceived balance of the estimated revenues of the Board, as set out in the estimates adopted for the fiscal year.
6. This Resolution shall continue in force until it is revoked by further Resolution of the Board.
565 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
REPORT NO. 15, STANDING COMMITTEE
(Public Session)
October 21, 1998
To the Chair and Members of The Toronto District School Board
The Standing Committee of the Toronto District School Board convened at 7:10 p.m. on October 21, 1998, in the Board Room at 155 College Street, Toronto, Ontario, with Co-Chair Jeff Kendall presiding.
The following members were present: Trustees Irene Atkinson, Brian Blakeley, Donna Cansfield, Judi Codd, Christine Ferreira, Gerri Gershon, Suzan Hall, Elizabeth Hill, Jeff Kendall, Shelley Laskin, Sheine Mankovsky, Ron McNaughton, David Moll, Barbara Nash, Gail Nyberg, Stephnie Payne, Lilein Schaeffer, Doug Stephens and Mike Thomas.
Regrets were received from Trustees Diane Cleary and Sheila Ward.
1. (a) Delegations
The Standing Committee heard delegations who spoke on the subject matters highlighted below:
Parent Safety Program
1. Norm Wolter – Parent Safety Program
Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity Policy
2. Dr. Joseph Y. K. Wong – National Movement for Harmony in Canada, Yee Hong Community Wellness Foundation, The Chinese Community of Toronto 3. Michelle Sokovnin – Parent 4. Nora Allinghan – Professor, York University 5. Yasmine Zeen – Muslim Education Network Training and Outreach Services
Child Care In Schools
6. Elaine Levy – Toronto School-Based Child Care Committee 7. Sheryl DeGras – Child Care Advisory Committee (CCAC) of the City of Toronto 8. Elizebeth Parkinson – Brant Street Daycare, Downtown Alternative School and ALPHA Alternative School 9. Jane French – Clinton School-Age Daycare, Inc. 10. Lorysa Meadowcroft – Playhouse Childcare (North York Branch) 11. Fatima Alves – St. Stephen’s Community House 12. Susan Fletcher – Metro Association of Family Resources 13. Andrea Chambers – Red Apple Daycare Board of Directors 14. Denise Tynes – Finch Flyers Child Care Centre 15. Michael Sobocan – The Learning Enrichment Foundation
566 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
16. Suzanne Wallman and Carol Smith – Laurier C.I. Not Your Average Daycare (N.Y.A.D.) Community Inc.
(b) Written Submissions
Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity Policy
1. Gary Kamino - Principal, Brookbanks Public School 2. Ronald Foster - Teacher, Scarborough
Child Care in Schools
3. Pam Roberts – The Learning Enrichment Foundation 4. Tracy Noble – Parent, Pat Schultz Childcare Center 5. Hazel Blythe – Chair, Board of Directors, Orde Day Care 6. Richard Jennings – Parent, Annette Public School President of Board of Directors, Junction Day Care 7. Sian Meikle – Board of Directors, Orde Day Care 8. Sandy Couto Green – Palmerston Community Daycare 9. Penny Smith & Niche Rassenti – Parents 10. Margaret A. Buszynski – Maurice Cody Child Care 11. Sharon Brayley – Finch Flyers Daycare 12. Mary-Anne Bédard – Supervisor of Ferncliff Daycare 13. Jane Harper – Eastview Public School Daycare 14. Paul Lae – Beatty Buddies 15. Mandy Wong – Finch Flyers Daycare 16. Fiona Itamunoala – Co-Chair, Balmy Beach Community Daycare 17. Sheila A. Keogh – President, Parklawn Preschool 18. Byron Yankou & Nancy Barkley – Parents 19. Andrea Chambers – Parent 20. Cheryl MacDonald – Metro Toronto Coalition for Better Child Care 21. Sue Johnston - Coordinator, Orde Day Care
2. Re-ordering of the Agenda
The Standing Committee reports having reordered its agenda in order to consider item 5.6, the “Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity Policy”, in advance of item 5.4, “Implementation Plan re Curriculum Documents”, as delegates who made presentations on this subject matter were in attendance at the meeting.
3. Status Report and Implementation of The Provincial Report Card, Grades 1-8
The Standing Committee had before it a report providing information on the implementation of the Provincial Report Card, Grades 1-8 across the Toronto District School Board.
The report advises that the Ministry of Education and Training (MET) has been engaged for a period of time in the development of a province wide report card. During the 1996-97 school year, many of the former boards in the Toronto District School Board were involved in a MET pilot project to field test the report card. In the 1997-98 school year, school boards in the province began implementation of the provincial report card in at least 30% of the schools in their jurisdiction. Beginning in 1998-99, the provincial report card is to be used for all students, Grades 1-8, in publicly funded schools in Ontario.
567 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Key Features of the Provincial Report Card
The Provincial Report Card indicates achievement through letter designations for Grades 1-6, and percentage marks and grade averages for Grades 7 and 8. The design of the provincial report card matches the Ontario curricula in each subject. Students will have their progress measured against the provincial standard that is Level 3, which is equivalent to a B, or 70-79%. In this way, teachers can communicate information about student achievement to parents clearly and precisely.
School Boards are required to use the provincial report card for formal written reports to parents three times a year. The first report is to be sent home during the fall.
The Ministry is making the provincial report card available to school boards in both electronic and print formats.
Implementation of the Provincial Report Card, Grades 1-8 for the 1998-99 School Year
A written communication was sent to all Toronto District School Board schools on September 23, 1998, indicating a reporting schedule as follows:
(a) The first reporting period, including written reports and parent/student/teacher interviews, is to be scheduled during November-December 1998;
(b) The second reporting period, including written reports and parent/student-teacher interviews, is to be scheduled during February-March 1999;
(c) The third report card will be sent home in June 1999.
Each Education Office has two designated contacts: one for curriculum and overall implementation, and one for the technology related to the electronic format of the report card.
Provision is being made for in-service of teachers through each Education Office as follows:
(a) overall implementation of the report cards; and
(b) computer technology training for the electronic reporting process.
A handbook for teachers is being developed to supplement the Ministry Guide to The Provincial Report Card, Grades 1-8. In addition, a parent/guardian pamphlet is being prepared for the Toronto District School Board.
Kindergarten Report Card
In order to provide consistency for the reporting practices that will apply as a child progresses through the grades, the Toronto District School Board has developed a Kindergarten report card. In addition to reflecting the features of The Provincial Report Card, Grades 1-8, the Kindergarten report card also provides information to parents about their child’s achievement of the program expectations outlined in the Ministry document, The Kindergarten Program 1998. In this way, a solid foundation can be built for parents to understand the reporting practices in the elementary system.
568 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
The written communication sent to all Toronto District School Board schools on September 23, 1998, indicated a reporting schedule and format for Kindergarten as follows:
(a) the first reporting period, in the form of parent/student-teacher conferences, is to be scheduled during November-December 1998;
(b) the second reporting period that will take place during February-March 1999 will include both written reports and parent/student-teacher interviews in keeping with the intent to help parents understand the reporting process;
(c) the third report card will be sent home in June 1999.
In-service to assist kindergarten teachers on implementing the report card will be provided through each Education Office.
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that:
(a) the Status Report and Implementation of The Provincial Report Card, Grades 1-8, be received;
(b) a report on the number of and profile of students who have not been promoted to the next grade level be presented to the Board on a yearly basis by the Director of Education.
4. Child Care in Schools Policy (Amended, see Pages 542, 573)
The Standing Committee considered a report presenting the new Child Care in Schools Policy and giving recognition to the work of the Policy Task Group.
The report notes that the Child Care in Schools Task Group was established in April 1998, and met weekly through May and June. The membership of the Task Group included staff, representatives of employee groups, school councils and community organizations and is shown on page 575.
The Task Group developed the following documents, which were attached as appendices:
• Background Paper for the consultation process • Policy Statement
Trustees reviewed this information at a seminar presented on September 16, 1998.
Overlap with Other Task Groups
The proposed Child Care in Schools Policy addresses policy areas being considered by other Task Groups. In particular:
• Community Use of Schools, Leases, Licenses, Permits Policy • Pupil Accommodation Review Policy • Optional Attendance Policy
569 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Information related to the consultation process and Board approval timelines for the other related Task Groups will be communicated to the Child Care in Schools Task Group and to the child care community in order that they be provided with an opportunity for input.
Capital Assets Management Plan
The Belief Statement concerning Facilities includes the following position:
The Board values and supports the utilisation of its facilities to accommodate child care programs where space is available (given provincial funding, child care space can only be provided on a cost-recovery basis).
In addition, Section 8.1.7 states that child care programs are a priority for long-term space in schools.
Procedures for Policy Implementation Procedures to support the implementation of the Policy will be developed after the Draft Policy has received Board approval.
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that:
(a) the Policy for Child Care in Schools be approved (amended, see Pages 542, 573); and
(b) a letter be distributed to the appropriate parents and child care operators outlining the impact of the provincial government’s funding model on child care in schools.
5. Report of the Task Group on Distribution and Display of Materials for Students and Parents
The Standing Committee considered a report presenting a proposed draft policy and procedures for the Distribution and Display of Materials for Students and Parents.
The report indicates that the Distribution and Display of Materials for Students and Parents Task Group is one of twelve task groups developing new policies and procedures for the consideration of the Board. The Task Group who has been meeting since May 7, 1998 developed a work plan that included an examination of past practices and the relevant recommendations of the LEIC committees. The Task Group was comprised of a varied membership to ensure that a variety of stakeholders were considered in the formation of the draft policy. The membership of the Task Group is shown on page 576.
The Mandate of the Distribution and Display of Materials for Students and Parents Task Group was to develop policies and procedures to best serve the needs of the students, staff, parents and community of the Toronto District School Board for the present and the future.
The Task Group undertook to:
• review the existing policies of the former area boards; • identify the scope of the policy’s mandate; • identify any additional issues or special circumstances.
The Task Group, in preparing the draft policy, has developed guiding principles and administrative procedures to ensure that the parameters regarding the distribution and display of materials for students and parents support the Board’s Mission and Values Statement, while
570 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998 at the same time value school organizations, community organizations and charitable institutions as community partners.
The Director undertook to advise the Board concerning celebrations and other events in schools connected to religious holidays, in relation to this policy and accompanying procedures.
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that:
(a) the report and draft policy and administrative procedures on the Distribution and Display of Materials for Students and Parents, be received; and
(b) the Board approve the release of the draft policy on the Distribution and Display of Materials for Students and Parents for public consultation, within the framework being developed by the Chair's Committee which will be presented to the Board on October 28, 1998;
(c) the application of the Draft Policy with regard to Trustees be referred to the Editorial Board for the Trustees Newsletter.
6. Report of the Task Group on Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity
The Standing Committee considered a report presenting a draft of the Antiracism and Ethno- cultural Equity Policy for the Toronto District School Board prior to seeking community response.
The report points out that the Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity Task Group is one of twelve task groups developing new policies and procedures for consideration by the Board. The membership of the task group is shown on page 577.
The mandate of the Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity Task Group was to develop a policy that would best serve the present and future needs of the students, parents, staff and the community.
The task group held its first meeting on May 5, 1998. It developed a work plan that included an examination of the final report of the LEIC Equity sub-committee, a thorough review of the Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity Policies of the former Metro Toronto School Boards, as well as the Ministry of Education and Training Policy Memorandum 119 outlining the development and implementation of school board policies on Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity.
The task group made an effort to ensure that the voices and perspectives of students, parents/guardians, community groups and staff were incorporated in the principles and core objectives of the policy.
Members of the Task Group are committed to:
• challenging racism in schools and workplaces;
• forging partnerships with the aboriginal, racial, ethno-cultural, and faith communities;
• including in the education process the perspectives and concerns of all communities represented in our schools; and
571 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
• ensuring that the Toronto District School Board is antiracist and equitable in its practices and day-to-day operations.
Plans for consultation have been referred to the committee charged with the responsibility of consolidating and managing all community consultations. Prior to the establishment of this committee, the task group had recommended written responses as well as three community consultation forums.
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that:
(a) the report of the Task Group on Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity be received by the Board;
(b) the Board approve the release of the Draft Policy on Antiracism and Ethno-cultural Equity be approved for public consultation, within the framework being developed by the Chair’s Committee;
(c) the Director of Education report to the October 28, 1998 Board meeting on the future steps to be taken to include other equity areas. (See Page 541)
7. Deferral of Agenda Items
The Standing Committee reports that the staff reports and Notices of Motions listed below, which were presented for consideration at this time, were referred, without recommendation, to the next scheduled Board meeting for consideration.
(i) Interim Selection, Promotion and Placement Procedure for Principals and Vice-Principals (ii) Implementation Plan for The Ontario Curriculum (ii) Secondary School Reform: Update (iv) Notice of Motion from Trustee Kendall concerning the Parent Safety Program (v) Notice of Motion from Trustee Ward regarding inquiries to staff (vi) Notice of Motion from Trustee Payne regarding staffing matters
8. Adjournment
The Standing Committee adjourned its meeting at 11:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeff Kendall Co-Chair of Standing Committee
Adopted, as amended, October 28, 1998.
572 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
CHILD CARE IN SCHOOLS POLICY (Adopted, as amended, see Page 542)
Toronto District School Board supports child care in schools as an integral component of the education system, and believes that:
Χ High quality child care supports the intellectual, physical, emotional and social well-being of children
Χ Early learning opportunities in child care make a positive contribution to school readiness and long term educational success for many children.
Χ Child Care in the school setting provides a supportive and secure environment and promotes a continuum of care and learning between child care and school programs
Χ Families, communities, agencies and all levels of government are important partners with school boards in the provision of child care in schools.
Χ Child care services in schools provide an essential support for parents/guardians, and caregivers.
Χ Access to regulated child care programs is necessary for student parents to achieve their educational goals.
Therefore, the Toronto District School Board is committed to:
Χ building a strong partnership between child care and school board programs in order to support curriculum and program co-ordination that will benefit students, families and communities.
Χ supporting schools, families and communities in the establishment and operation of school-based child care.
Χ working in partnership with other levels of government and the community to achieve equitable access to child care services across the City.
Χ utilizing school board facilities to accommodate child care programs and will provide exclusive and shared-use space that meets the standards required for licensing, where it is available, on a cost-recovery basis
Χ recognizing child care centres need for security in their occupancy arrangements, and will establish terms and conditions that are fair and reasonable for the use of school board facilities. These arrangements will also preserve the Board=s ability to accommodate and provide appropriate instructional programs for its students.
Χ providing predictability and continuity for children, families and school communities, and will provide a priority in school admissions policies for children who attend school-based child care, and will encourage consistency between school board and child care admissions policies.
573 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Χ establishing structures and processes which will give parents, community members and child care providers opportunities to provide advice and respond to the Board=s initiatives related to child care.
Χ providing appropriate resources to ensure the implementation of the Child Care in Schools Policy.
574 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
CHILD CARE IN SCHOOLS TASK GROUP (See Page 569)
Name Location
TRUSTEES Judi Codd - Ward 21 5050 Yonge Street - North York Elizabeth Hill - Ward 6 155 College St. - Toronto Lilein Schaeffer - Ward 15 155 College St. - Toronto
PROJECT SPONSOR Carole Olsen (Gary Parkinson) 45 York Mills Road
SENIOR MANAGER Marilyn Sullivan (Jeffrey May) 155 College St. - Toronto
STAFF Dawn Bradstreet 1 Civic Centre - Etobicoke Janet Davis 155 College St. - Toronto Jeffrey May 140 Borough Drive - Scarborough Pat Shaughnessy /Rose 2 Trethewey Dr. - York DiVincenzo Valerie Sterling 5050 Yonge St. - North York
TEACHER FEDERATION REPS
PRINCIPALS Karen Hume Marc Garneau C.I. - East York (Sec.) Wes Lorimer 140 Borough Dr.- Scarborough (Elem.)
UNION/STAFF ASSOCIATION REPS
SCHOOL ADVISORY Catherine O=Hanley-Cocorocchio East York - East York Collegiate COUNCILS Cindy McCarthy Etobicoke - Eatonville Jr Brian Robinson Toronto - Roden P.S.
STUDENTS
COMMUNITY/PAREN Carol Smith Toronto School-Based Child Care T ORGANIZATION Committee Cheryl MacDonald Metro Coalition for Better Child Care Spyros Volonakis Toronto Child Care Advisory Committee
RESEARCH Susan Manning 140 Borough - Scarborough MANAGER
RECORDING Pauline Duquette-Newman 155 College St. - Toronto SECRETARY
ADMINISTRATIVE Jenny Lo 155 College St. - Toronto ASSISTANT
575 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
DISTRIBUTION AND DISPLAY OF MATERIALS FOR STUDENTS AND PARENTS
TASK GROUP MEMBERSHIP (see Page 570)
Manager Don Shank (retired)
Trustees Gerri Gershon Elizabeth Hill
Principal/Vice-Principal Elaine Kapusta
Staff Margaret Kent Tasneem Khan Trevor Ludski Meredith MacFarquhar Evelyn Wilson
School Council Ravi Paul Alice Pelegris
Recording Secretary Chris Pavlidis
576 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
MEMBERSHIP OF THE ANTIRACISM AND ETHNOCULTURAL EQUITY POLICY TASK GROUP (see page 571)
Community
Alice DeSousa CUPE Local 4400 Kemi Jacobs Executive Director, Culture Link Bob Longworth Urban Alliance (Education Committee) Suraj Persad Ontario Multifaith Council
Parents
Glenn Anderson Toronto, Ryerson Community School Calvin Bernard Scarborough, Agincourt C.I. Michelle Sokovnin North York, Owen P.S.
Staff
Sharon Bate Executive Officer Gail Davis Principal, Presteign Heights P.S. Marcela Duran Consultant, Equity in the Curriculum Kim Grimes Recording Secretary, 140 Borough Dr. Madge Logan Superintendent - Literacy, Special Education, Equity - 5050 Yonge Street Trevor Ludski Coordinator of Antiracism and Ethnocultural Equity, 140 Borough Dr. Myra Novogrodsky Coordinator, Equity Studies, 155 College St. Karl Sprogis Vice-Principal, Lakeshore Collegiate Jim Watt Superintendent of Schools, Brookbanks Fern Westernoff Speech-Language Pathologist, 140 Borough Dr.
Students
Narjis Ali L'Amoreaux C.I. Gavriel Beigel Bloor C.I.
Trustees
Suzan Hall Trustee, Ward 19 Stephnie Payne Trustee, Ward 2 Mike Thomas Trustee, Ward 9
577 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
REPORT NO. 8, Chair's Committee
October 5, 1998
To the Chair and Members of the Toronto District School Board:
A meeting of the Chair's Committee was held this day at 155 College Street, from 1:10 p.m. to 3:35 p.m. The following Committee members were present: Trustees Nyberg (Chair), Gershon and Hall. Trustee Kendall sent his regrets. The following members were also present: Trustees Atkinson, Blakeley, Codd, Ferreira, Hill, Laskin, Mankovsky, Nash and Schaeffer.
The committee decided to report and recommend as follows:
1. Public Consultation Process for Policy Development Task Groups
The Committee considered a report of the officials, dated October 2, 1998, advising that at its meeting of February 25, 1998, the Board established 12 task groups to develop priorities for policy development. These are:
* Access to Programs and Optional Attendance * Antiracism and Ethnocultural Equity * Child Abuse and Sexual Abuse * Child Care in Schools * Community Use of Schools: Leases, Permits and Rentals * Distribution and Display of Materials for Students and Parents * Employer Duties re Occupational Health and Safety Act * Human Rights, Discrimination and Harassment * Parent, Student and Community Involvement * Property Utilization and School Boundaries * Safe Schools (MET Violence-Free School Policy) * Transportation of Students
The Board had previously approved a Framework for Policy Development which detailed the principles, purposes and strategies for consultation. It was intended that this consultation process would give individuals on representative groups, that could not be accommodated as members of task groups, an opportunity to contribute to the development of policies and procedures.
In order to determine an appropriate means of consulting on the reports of the task groups, the task group managers and trustees from the Policies and Procedures Project Team met on September 23 and 30, 1998. This committee noted that there was a conflict between speedy completion and detailed public review. A number of considerations were noted as important to determining the appropriate means of consulting on the task group reports:
* the consultation needs of the groups varied; * the reports are being completed at different times (some have already been to Board, others will not be completed until at least November); * different individuals or groups will have an interest in different reports; * there are operational necessities which dictate the timelines for some of the reports;
578 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
* individuals and groups must perceive that they have had the opportunity to receive and comment on the reports.
As a result of these considerations, the committee determined that the consultation plan should be based on the needs of each group and that consultations should only be carried out simultaneously where the needs of each report can be met. The committee determined that it was an appropriate body to recommend to the Standing Committee the timing of the consultations, as the reports were ready. It was also noted that contradictions or gaps might occur between the task group reports. The task group managers will review the reports to identify these contradictions or gaps.
It is RECOMMENDED:
(a) that each task group have a consultation plan that meets the needs of their report;
(b) that combined consultations be planned only where this will not compromise the input to any of the reports;
(c) that the consultations for Access to Program and Optional Attendance be considered for consultation in November; and
(d) that task group managers and trustees on the Policies and Procedures Project Team advise the Standing Committee on the plan and timing of each report as it is ready for consideration by the Standing Committee.
2. The Toronto Foundation for Student Success
The Committee was advised that the Toronto District School Board Charitable Foundation is nearing reality. A name has been chosen - The Toronto Foundation for Student Success - and the legal process to become a registered charity is well underway.
The Committee was further advised the process has begun of approaching individuals to become Honourary Advisors to the Foundation and to sit on the Board of Directors. It has been decided to have trustee representation on the Foundation's Board of Directors and the Board has been requested to name three trustees as Directors of the Toronto Foundation for Student Success.
It is RECOMMENDED that Trustees Donna Cansfield, Sheine Mankovsky and David Moll be appointed as Directors of the Toronto Foundation for Student Success.
Respectfully submitted,
GAIL NYBERG Chair of Committee
Adopted, October 28, 1998
579 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
REPORT NO. 9, Chair's Committee
October 26, 1998
To the Chair and Members of the Toronto District School Board:
A meeting of the Chair's Committee was held this day at 155 College Street, from 1:10 p.m. to 3:15 p.m. The following Committee members were present: Trustees Nyberg (Chair), Gershon and Hall. Trustee Kendall sent his regrets. Trustees Atkinson, Codd, Ferreira, Hall, Hill, Laskin and Schaeffer were also present.
The Committee decided to report and recommend as follows:
1. Guidelines for the Management of the Delegation Procedure
The Committee has discussed developing guidelines to assist in managing the delegation procedure, as requested at the September 23, 1998 Board meeting. Issues considered by the Committee included: limiting the total number of delegations heard at any one; encouraging written submissions in lieu of delegations; and consultations with affected communities that provide more meaningful input than delegations at the final stage of the decision-making process. The Board discussed this matter in the context of the procedure that establishes an ending time for Board and Standing Committee meetings and the need for the Board to continue to develop processes that facilitate the consideration of business.
It is recommended:
(a) That the Standing Committee and the Board hear up to ten delegations at one meeting.
(b) That either the Chair of the Board or the appropriate Co-Chair of the Standing Committee work with staff from Senior Administrative Services to apportion the delegations between the issues before the Standing Committee and the Board, such apportionment to be based on the nature of the issues before the meeting (was there consultation?/will there be consultation?/is the Board making a final decision?) and the numbers requesting to speak on an issue at that meeting.
(c) That written submissions be encouraged from those wishing to make their views known to the Board, and that these written submissions be placed before the members, acknowledged and officially received at the meeting, and noted in the report of the Standing Committee and the Board minutes.
(d) That, at any meeting which will hear four or more delegations, delegations be limited to three minutes each and be so advised in advance of the meeting.
(e) That Senior Administrative Services provide a written information sheet to each delegation prior to their presentation, such information sheet to outline expectations, time limits, questions, etc., and that Senior Administrative Services ensure that there is a staff person at the Board Room door to answer questions from delegations in advance of their presentation and otherwise manage the process of hearing delegations.
580 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
(f) That for the issue of school closings, where the Board will be instituting an extensive consultation process outside of the Board's regular business process, delegations not be heard at either Board or Standing Committee meetings.
2. Start Time of Board and Standing Committee Meetings
The Committee requested that staff survey trustees as to whether it would be possible for them to attend Board and Standing Committee meetings commencing at 4:00 p.m., rather than at 6:00 p.m. Trustees have responded to the survey as follows:
18 trustees can attend meetings that commence at 4:00 p.m.
3 trustees cannot attend meetings that commence at 4:00 p.m.
1 trustee can attend meetings that commence at 4:00 p.m. some of the time.
It is recommended:
(a) That the private session of Board meetings (Committee of the Whole) and the Standing Committee commence at either 4:30 p.m. or 5:00 p.m., as decided by the Chair of the Board and the Vice-Chair of the Board, or the appropriate Co-Chair of the Standing Committee, and the Director of Education.
(b) That the public session of Board and Standing Committee meetings commence at 6:30 p.m.
3. Consultations for November, 1998
It is recommended:
(a) That consultation on the Access to Programs and Optional Attendance Task Group Draft Policy consist of:
* a focus group meeting (more than one may be held); * circulation of the draft policy to principals and school councils; * use of the TDSB website.
(b) That consultation on the Distribution and Display of Materials for Students and Parents consist of focus groups including the Toronto School Administrators Association (TSAA), school council chairs and charitable organizations and partners.
Note: Trustee communications are not included as part of this policy and will be reviewed separately by the Editorial Board for the Trustees' Newsletter.
4. Ward Boundaries
For the information of the Board, the Committee was advised that the City of Toronto is reviewing the matter of changing ward boundaries for the next municipal election. Staff intend to secure copies of the staff report and options for ward boundaries and representation changes for the Board meeting of October 28, 1998. The consultation process is as noted in a notice published by the City on October 26, 1998.
581 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
The Committee received a communication from Councillor Bruce Sinclair requesting the Mayor to give consideration to the ramifications that any ward boundary changes will have on school boards and trustees.
Respectfully submitted,
GAIL NYBERG Chair of Committee
Adopted, October 28, 1998.
582 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
REPORT NO. 6, SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
October 8 1998
The Special Education Advisory Committee met this day in the Board Room, 155 College Street, commencing at 7:30 p.m. and concluding at 10:15 p.m.
Members Present: Trustee Brian Blakeley, Ward 11 Sandra Dell, Easter Seal Society (Chair) Merle Fedirchuk, Brain Injury Association of Toronto Liz Fisher, Community Derryn Gill, Spina Bifida and Hydrocephalus Association of Ontario Trustee Suzan Hall, Ward 19 (Vice-Chair) Anne McCauley, Autism Society of Ontario George Mielniczek, Alternate, VOICE for Hearing Impaired Children Janice Owen, Community Debbie Philips, Down Syndrome Association of Metro Toronto Candice Potter, Tourette Syndrome Association of Metropolitan Toronto Trustee Lilein Schaeffer, Ward 15 Catherine Stewart, Metro Toronto Association for Community Living Pat Sullivan, Learning Disabilities Association Michelle Worley, Association for Bright Children
Regrets: Allison Ferrier, VOICE for Hearing Impaired Children Ketisha Thompson, Community
Absent: Bruce Creighton, Ontario Federation for Cerebral Palsy Terry Lustig, VIEWS for the Visually Impaired
Alternates Present: Susan Kelsall, Association for Bright Children Mara Meikle, Spina Bifida and Hydrocephalus Association of Ontario Frieda Morden, Learning Disabilities Association Robert Perkins, Down Syndrome Association of Metropolitan Toronto
1. Presentations:
The Committee reports having heard presentations on the following topics and having thanked the presenters for the information provided:
A) Province-wide Testing:
a) The “Education Quality and Accountability Office Provincial Report on Achievement 1996-1997” by Joan Green, Chief Executive Officer, Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO)
583 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
b) The “Parent Handbook 1997-1998” (Grade 3 Assessment of Reading, Writing, and Mathematics: 1997-1998 and the Grade 9 Assessment of Mathematics 1997-1998) by Nadia Templeton, Corporate Communication Coordinator, EQAO.
c) Information on “Accommodations and Exemptions” for students with special needs to enable them to participate with their peers in all aspects of the assessment presented by Dr. Roz Doctorow, Education Officer, EQAO.
B) Epilepsy:
a) The causes and impact of Epilepsy by Jyoti Sanwalka, Curriculum Chairperson, Heritage Park P.S.
2. Special Education Plan – 1998/1999
The Committee had for consideration the following material with respect to the annual review process of the 1998/1999 Special Education Plan which is to be submitted to the Ministry of Education and Training by May 15, 1999:
a) a proposed outline of the topics to be addressed within the Plan (on file); and b) a proposed schedule for the development of the Plan (October 1998 – May 1999).
The proposed schedule is as follows: October 1998 S.E.A.C. support for proposed schedule S.E.A.C. support for proposed content of plan Establishing writing teams
November/ Statement of philosophy (Belief Statement) December 1998 Statement on integration Delivery of service model Analysis of content of LEIC documents
January/ Consultation with S.E.A.C. for support of content to date February 1999
March 1999 S.E.A.C. conceptual support of document
April 1999 S.E.A.C. support of Special Education Plan Board approval of Special Education Plan
May 1999 S.E.A.C./Board approval to submit Plan to District Office
May 15, 1999 Submission of Board-approved Plan to District Office.
The Committee advises that it supports the proposed topics and process and the proposed schedule for the development of the 1998/99 Special Education Plan.
3. Update on Services to Students Over Age 21
Staff advised that, in accordance with the new government initiatives, the Ministry does not allocate monies towards services for special needs students over the age of 21.
584 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
The Committee recommends that a letter be forwarded to the Ministries of Education and Training, Community and Social Services, and the Ministry of Health expressing the Committee’s grave concerns with the lack of financial resources to address the needs of exceptional students over the age of twenty one.
4. Events and Activities – Local Associations
a) The Easter Seal Society will hold its first “Teen Mentoring” delegate training session in Metro on Thursday, October 15 – 17, 1998. Thirty participants will be trained as mentors to deliver the program to Easter Seal youths within local communities as well as regionally across the Province.
b) Easter Seals will host their Provincial S.E.A.C. training in Metro on November 21 and 22, 1998. To register, please call Sandra Dell, 416-421-8778 ext. 341.
c) The Neuro Rehabilitation Program at Bloorview MacMillan Centre is hosting “Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) Partnering Day – Bridge the Gaps”, Bloorview Site Auditorium, 25 Buchan Court, Toronto, Thursday, November 12, 1998. The objective is to identify gaps in service, to develop an action plan and to facilitate ongoing dialogue.
d) The Pediatric Subcommittee of the Provincial Acquired Brain Injury Advisory Committee has received funding to develop a comprehensive inventory of existing services throughout Ontario for children and youth with ABI. This will identify issues, concerns and successes and make recommendations for effective programming for children and youth with ABI.
5. 1999 Schedule of Meetings
The Committee considered a proposed 1999 Schedule of Meetings. Secretary’s Note: Subsequent to this meeting, it was agreed that the 1999 Schedule of Meetings would be determined at the Committee’s next meeting on November 9, 1998.
Respectfully submitted,
Sandra Dell Chair of Committee
Adopted, October 28, 1998.
585 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Report No. 18, Committee of the Whole (Private Session) October 28, 1998
To the Chair and Members of the Toronto District School Board:
A meeting of the Committee of the Whole (Private Session) convened at 6:00 p.m. in the Board Room at 155 College Street, Toronto, Ontario with Trustee Susan Hall, Vice-Chair of the Board, presiding.
The following members were present: Trustees Irene Atkinson, Brian Blakeley, Donna Cansfield, Diane Cleary, Judi Codd, Christine Ferreira, Gerri Gershon, Suzan Hall, Elizabeth Hill, Jeff Kendall, Shelley Laskin, Sheine Mankovsky, Ron McNaughton, David Moll, Barbara D. Nash, Gail Nyberg, Stephnie Payne, Lilein Schaeffer, Doug Stephens, Mike Thomas, and Sheila Ward.
Regrets were received from Trustee Elizebeth Moyer.
1. Declarations of Possible Conflicts of Interest
Trustee Blakeley declared a possible conflict of interest with regard to Support Staff Terminations and Update on Negotiations, indicating that the general nature of his interest is that he is an employee of the union which represents support staff. He did not take part in the discussion or vote on these matters when considered by the Committee of the Whole, in private.
Trustee Cansfield declared a possible conflict of interest with regard to Student Information System and Financial Information Systems Update presented as part of Report No. 14 of the Standing Committee (Private Session). She stated that the nature of her interest is that her husband is an employee of IBM Canada. She did not take part in the discussion or vote on these matters when considered by the Committee of the Whole, in private.
Trustee Kendall declared a possible conflict of interest with regard to the item entitled Update on negotiations (support staff), indicating that the nature of his interest is that his mother is a school secretary. He did not take part in the discussion or vote on this matter when considered by the Committee of the Whole, in private.
2. Staff Changes
The Committee of the Whole recommends approval of the Staff Changes on file in the Director’s Office.
3. Facilities Utilization Plan
The Committee considered a report from the officials entitled School Closures, A Response to the Provincial Government’s Student-Focused Funding Model. This report forms part of the Toronto District School Board’s Facility Utilization Plan. The purpose of the report was to recommend possible candidate schools for closure to attempt to meet the Ministry’s entitled square footage target while retaining sufficient capacity to accommodate all students in the Toronto District School Board.
586 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
The Committee of the Whole recommends that:
(a) the School Closures, A Response to the Provincial Government’s Student-Focused Funding Model report be received;
(b) a series of community information meetings be held in November and December, 1998;
(c) a report be forwarded to the School Board in November to outline the establishment of the Area Review Committees for community consultation; and
(d) the report be shared with all interested groups in the City of Toronto and the Government of Ontario.
4. Student Information System
The Committee considered a report of the officials regarding the selection of a Student Information System for the Toronto District School Board and the approval for the beginning of contract negotiations with SRB International as the preferred supplier.
The Committee of the Whole recommends that:
(a) SRB International’s Student Information System be selected as the Toronto District School Board’s new Student Information System; and
(b) authority be granted to begin negotiations for the purchase of the SRB International’s Student Information System by the Toronto District School Board in accordance with the Board’s purchasing policy.
5. Update on Negotiations (Support Staff)
The Committee of the Whole recommends that an oral report of staff on negotiations regarding support staff be received.
6. Report No. 14, Standing Committee
The Committee of the Whole recommends that Report No. 14, Standing Committee (Private Session), October 14, 1998, be adopted. (page 588)
Respectfully submitted,
Susan Hall Chair of Committee
Adopted, October 28, 1998.
587 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
REPORT NO. 14, STANDING COMMITTEE
(Private Session)
October 14, 1998
To the Chair and Members of The Committee of the Whole (Private Session)
The Standing Committee (Private Session) of the Toronto District School Board convened at 9:15 p.m. on October 14, 1998, in the Board Room at 155 College Street, Toronto, Ontario, with Co-Chair Jeff Kendall presiding.
The following members were present: Trustees Irene Atkinson, Donna Cansfield, Diane Cleary, Judi Codd, Christine Gerri, Gerri Gershon, Suzan Hall, Elizabeth Hill, Jeff Kendall, Shelley Laskin, Sheine Mankovsky, David Moll, Ron McNaughton, Barbara Nash, Gail Nyberg, Lilein Schaeffer, Doug Stephens, Mike Thomas and Sheila Ward.
Regrets were received from Trustees Brian Blakeley and Stephnie Payne.
1. Declaration of Possible Conflict of Interest
Trustee Cansfield declared a possible conflict of interest with regard to the item on the Financial Information Systems Update. She stated that the nature of her interest is that her husband is an employee of I.B.M. Canada. Trustee Cansfield did not take part in the discussion or vote on this item.
2. Acquisition of Legal Services (Report No. 6, Chair’s Committee)
The Standing Committee considered report No. 6, of the Chair’s Committee, Private Session, regarding a report of the officials providing information about the prevalent means of acquisition of legal services by other school districts and other public institutions and recommending a process for the acquisition of legal services for the Toronto District School Board.
The report advises that a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the acquisition of legal services is being tabled with the Board for approval because of the difficult nature of any evaluating process that can be developed and the past direct connection to this service by Trustees. Although it is not an Education Act requirement for the Board to appoint a lawyer(s) or firm(s) as it is with the Board’s Auditor it is believed that the nature of the working relationship can be very similar with legal opinions reported to the Board for consideration.
Research was conducted to determine how other school districts and other public institutions acquire legal services.
A number of school districts were contacted as well as the Ministry of the Attorney General of the province of Ontario and the Department of Justice of the government of Canada.
School districts as well as the provincial and federal governments use in-house legal resources, external resources or a combination of these. The majority of the school districts contacted use external resources on an as needed basis. The provincial and federal governments rely mainly on their in-house legal resources.
588 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
Five of the nine school districts contacted use the RFP process to acquire legal services. The other four school districts contacted have, over time, established business relationships with certain legal firms and have not used a competitive process. The majority of the former Area Boards fall in the latter category.
Both the provincial and federal governments rely on their in-house legal staff for services and any external requirements for legal expertise are done by appointment.
Discussions with professional organizations such as the Purchasing Management Association of Canada and the National Institute of Government Purchasing indicate that there is a growing trend in public institutions in acquiring professional services, including legal services, through a competitive process.
While it is clear that the competitive process can be used to select firms to provide legal services, and while desirable, it is unlikely that one firm will have the depth of expertise in all the required areas. It is expected that the result of the process would be contracts with a number of firms specializing in specific areas, i.e., Labour Relations Law, Commercial Law, Litigation, etc.
It is therefore important that the appropriate requirements and evaluation criteria be incorporated in the RFP document. It is also appropriate that an evaluating committee comprised of persons with previous experience in this area be tasked with the responsibility of evaluating any proposals received. It would be advisable to include Trustees and staff in the evaluating committee. The RFP was prepared for consideration. The RFP proposes a two (2) year term with optional extensions. Prior to exercising any extensions, it is suggested that the Board undertake a review of the expenditures to determine if the establishment of internal legal resources or a combination of internal and external expertise would result in overall savings.
All law firms providing legal services to the former Area Boards should be invited to submit proposals and also posted on electronic tender networks for wider access.
Legal services contract expenditures can be better controlled when a clear billing process is in place and clear administrative guidelines for access to these services exist. The billing process will be determined through the RFP. It is very important that the guidelines be developed concurrently with the tendering process for legal services and be communicated to successful bidder(s) as well as staff in the Toronto District School Board.
To assist in the evaluation process, it is recommended that the Board issue three RFP’s for Property, Personnel and Labour Relations and General Legal issues. This would simplify sorting and analysis of each bidder and allow for focused expertise within specific firms.
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that:
(a) the Request For Proposals for Legal Services be approved with a two-year initial term and optional one-year extensions at the discretion of the Board;
(b) an evaluating committee be selected consisting of an appropriate number of Trustees and appropriate staff;
(c) administrative guidelines for access to Legal Services be developed and communicated to the system; and
589 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
(d) a cost/benefits analysis be conducted prior to exercising any extension options to determine if it would be cost-effective for the Board to establish internal legal resources; and
(e) the report be adopted by the School Board.
3. Request for Proposal for External Audit Services
The Standing Committee considered a report presenting for approval a Request For Proposal (RFP) for the appointment of the external audit services for the Toronto District School Board and to recommend that a Trustee “External Audit Services Selection Committee” be established to evaluate the proposals submitted and recommend one of the bidders for appointment as auditor.
The report advised that Section 253 of the Education Act requires that the Board appoint an auditor for a term not to exceed five years and that the auditor be licensed under the Public Accountancy Act. The RFP has been reviewed by Executive Council and is presented for approval by the Board. The RFP proposes a five-year term of appointment.
Executive Council approved the recommendation from staff for the appointment of an “External Audit Services Selection Committee” for the purposes of evaluating the responses and recommending a final firm for appointment. The suggested number of Trustees would be five. Two or three senior Business Services staff would also be appointed to serve as a resource for the Committee. The establishment of an Audit Committee of the Board will be addressed at a later date.
All audit firms providing external audit services to the former Area Boards will be invited to submit proposals and the RFP will also be posted on electronic tender networks for wider access.
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that:
(a) the Request for Proposal for External Audit Services be approved;
(b) an “External Audit Services Selection Committee” be established to evaluate the proposals submitted and recommend a bidder for appointment as auditor;
(c) the Board appoint up to five Trustees to serve on the “External Audit Services Selection Committee”; and
(d) the recommendation for the appointment of the auditor be presented to the Board no later than December 1998.
4. Financial Information Systems Update
The Standing Committee RECOMMENDS that:
(a) the contract with SAP Canada Inc. for the application software in the amount of $3,330,000 be approved;
(b) the contract with SAP Canada Inc. for the consultant services in the estimated amount of $2,990,000 be approved.
590 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
5. Notice of Motion – Trustee Nyberg re Change of Name for the ARC’s
Trustee Nyberg advised that she intends to bring forward a Notice of Motion that the name of the Area Review Committees be changed to “Provincial Government School Closure Committees”. (See Page 547)
6. New Business
The Standing Committee discussed the following matters:
(a) The timelines for the Capital Assets Management Plan and the process for the Area Review Committees (ARC’s).
(b) The Committee was advised of ongoing developments concerning the appeal of the recent court decision on Bill 160.
7. Adjournment
The Standing Committee (Private Session) adjourned its meeting at 10:56 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeff Kendall Co-Chair of Standing Committee
Adopted, October 28, 1998
591 Minutes of the Toronto District School Board October 28, 1998
BLANK PAGE
592