HomeMy WebLinkAbout11a Budget 19 May 1998 Minutes PublicOTTAWA - CARLETON DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
BUDGET COMMITTEE
MINUTES
19 May 1998
A meeting of the Budget Committee was held this evening in the Board Room, 133 Greenbank
Road, Nepean, commencing at 7.05 p.m. with Trustee Graham in the Chair and the following also in
attendance:
TRUSTEES: Cynthia Bled, Albert Chambers, Alex Getty, Patty -Anne Hill, Russ Jackson,
Andrew Lam, Jim Libbey, Norm MacDonald, Sheryl MacDonald, Pam Morse
and Lynn Scott
STAFF: Carola Lane, Director of Education and Secretary of the Board
Michael Clarke, Superintendent of Business and Treasurer of the Board
Lorne Rachlis, Superintendent of School Operations
Barbara Stollery, Superintendent of Program and Information Technology
Judy Turriff, Superintendent of Special Education and Student Services
Jim Vair, Superintendent of Human Resources
Michael Carlon, Superintendent of School Services
Dan Mason, Superintendent of School Services
Marie - Louise Chartrand, Comptroller of Finance
Laura McAlister, Principal,' Special Education
Carol Lithwick, Manager of Special Services
Dan Wiseman, Chief of Social Work
Joan Melancon, Assistant Secretary of the Board
Peter Frayne, Coordinator of Communications
Estelle Gunner, Committee Coordinator
NON - VOTING Jane Berman, Special Education Advisory Committee
REPRESENTATIVES: Joanne Catton, Ottawa - Carleton Elementary Vice - Principals' Association
Stan Currie, Ottawa - Carleton Assembly of School Councils
Janet Fader, Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (Teachers)
Paul Hankes- Drielsma, Ottawa - Carleton Student Presidents' Council
Diane Jeudy- Hugo, Ottawa- Carleton Secondary School Administrators'
Network
Len Lenser, Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (Support Staff)
Glenda Stevenson, Ottawa- Carleton Elementary Principals' Association
Dave Wildman, Ottawa - Carleton Elementary Teachers' Federation
ALSO PRESENT: Janice Ritchie, Ottawa - Carleton Assembly of School Councils, alternate
1. Call to Order /A1212roval of Agenda
On a motion by Trustee Lam, the agenda was approved, subject to re- ordering the proposed
amendments to the budget, as outlined in the memorandum from Trustee Lynn Graham, dated 19 May
1998.
2. Confirmation of Minutes of 7 May 1998 /Business Arising from the Minutes
On a motion by Trustee Sheryl MacDonald, the minutes of 7 May 1998 were confirmed as
written. There was no business arising from the minutes. Trustee Graham noted that the minutes of
12 May 1998 and 14 May 1998 would be distributed on Thursday, 21 May 1998.
Budget Committee 1 19 May 1998
3. Public Ouestion Period
a ) Sarah Foran queried the policy on bus passes for students who rely on transportation to
travel to the Alternate Program and to co- operative education placements. The Director advised that
decisions on transportation entitlements had not yet been finalized.
b) Julie Pilotte queried the cost of maintaining the Elizabeth Wyn Wood Alternate
Program at its current site and the cost of relocation, both in financial and human terms. Staff noted
that current costs for custodial services and utilities amount to approximately $120,000 per year.
Relocation could be accomplished through the use of Board personnel and minimal retrofitting is
anticipated. While it is difficult to quantify human costs, the Board is committed to ensuring that
students remain in school.
C) Sally McIntyre referred to a comment from staff at the Budget Committee meeting of
14 May 1998, indicating that the reinstatement of Junior Kindergarten across the jurisdiction would
facilitate early identification. Ms. McIntyre queried how this would be accomplished and how the
Board could provide the necessary supports, given the proposed cuts to staff. Ms. McIntyre also
requested a response to the question regarding the provincial average regarding students identified as
exceptional as compared with this Board's experience.
Superintendents Turriff and Stollery noted that both predecessor boards had an early
identification program in place. It is intended to enhance both early identification and early
intervention strategies. Staff will provide Ms. McIntyre with further information on these areas and
respond to the question regarding the provincial average.
d) Sheila Murphy expressed a concern about the possible cancellation of noon -hour busing
for rural students attending the Alternate Program at the Frederick Banting site. She noted that
transportation is crucial to this program. The Director reiterated that decisions on transportation
entitlements have not yet been finalized.
4. Delegations re 1998 Budget
Trustee Graham noted that five minutes would be permitted for presentations and a further five
minutes for questions from Committee members.
a) Ottawa- Carleton Assembly of School Councils
Spokespersons: Terry Leung and Lamar Mason Co- Chairs
On behalf of the Ottawa- Carleton Assembly of School Councils ( OCASC), Terry Leung outlined
a number of concerns and comments related to the draft budget and the budget process. He noted that
while OCASC welcomed the decision not to undertake school closures for September 1998, it recognizes
that this will require reductions in other areas to stay within the funding levels set by the province.
OCASC strongly supports the Board's efforts, in concert with other boards, to persuade the province to
be more flexible on timing and on aspects of the space allocation formula. The Assembly also supports
the underlying premise of the staff - recommended budget to protect programs and the classroom as much
as possible for the coming year, pending a further review. The Assembly urges the Board to involve
OCASC and stakeholders in this process.
OCASC is concerned about the inadequacy of information with regard to the rationale and
impact for proposed initiatives in the staff - recommended budget and the absence of a concrete
statement of intent from trustees regarding the broad issue of harmonization. The proposed extension of
the elementary congregated gifted program is an example of one area where additional information
would have been of assistance and would have addressed apparent misperceptions.
OCASC members have expressed the need for further information on the following: the impact
of reductions in special education support and in custodial and maintenance services; the formula for the
allocation of vice - principals; the elimination of guidance counsellors in Grades 7 and 8; the relocation
Budget Committee 2 19 May 1998
P•
of the Alternate Program; and the failure to extend Middle French Immersion and Early French
Immersion at the junior Kindergarten level to former CBE schools. OCASC considers that further
(W details should be provided with respect to these areas prior to final decisions being made.
The Assembly also supports the view that appropriate offsets should be identified when
additions to the budget are being considered and that the source of funds should be identified prior to
introducing proposals which would result in added expenses.
The Assembly recommends that the Board ensure that it has a full understanding of the
rationale and impact of all budget proposals before final decisions are made; that the Board prepare
its own space allocation and capacity model that realistically reflects student and administrative
requirements; that the Board undertake a detailed analysis of the funding model; and that the Board
immediately begin a program and services review.
Trustee Graham noted that the Committee has adopted the process recommended by the
Assembly for dealing with proposed amendments to the staff - recommended budget.
b) Frederick Banting Alternate Program
Spokespersons: Gordon Smith, Parent: Danielle Chapman, Former Student
Gordon Smith spoke on behalf of the Frederick Banting School Council. Mr. Smith thanked
staff and the Board for their efforts and noted that he was familiar with the challenge of working
with insufficient funding. He considered that all stakeholders must be prepared to work as a team to
express their concerns at the political level and pointed to the potential future need for partnerships to
raise private money to provide essential programs.
Mr. Smith advised that the Frederick Banting School Council shares a number of the concerns
related to the Alternate Program which have been outlined by previous presenters. He stressed the
importance of: maintaining the integrity of the Alternate Program; the unique delivery system;
transportation; and partnering with the community. Mr. Smith referred members to his written
submission which elaborates on these areas. Mr. Smith noted that the Alternate Program has
developed into a successful, cost - effective program and urged that it be maintained in its current format.
Danielle Chapman, a former student, recounted her personal experience and attributed the
success she has achieved to the support provided to her through the Alternate Program. She stressed
the need for a full-time social worker on site and the importance of maintaining the program at a
separate location.
In response to trustee queries, Ms. Chapman advised that she would not have been able to
succeed in the regular program, nor would she have been able to cope with the pressure, if the Alternate
Program had been located at a traditional site. Staff noted that further information on the costs
associated with moving the Alternate Program will be provided for the meeting of 21 May 1998.
C) Trillium School Council
j2okesperson: Susan Berry
On behalf of the Trillium School Council, Susan Berry expressed concern about reductions in
special education. She maintained that the student population of a school should be considered in
determining the special education resources to be allotted and pointed to the particular needs of
Trillium E.S. She noted that Trillium School Council's first priority is providing equal access to
educational opportunities for all pupils and that inadequate resources hurt all students. The Trillium
School Council endorses the integration of identified children in the regular classroom.
(W In reply to trustee queries, Ms. Berry advised that the school currently has two special
education teachers and 2.5 SETAs. The school considers that 3 teachers should be allocated and that
the SETA allocation of 2.5 should be maintained. The school has adopted a totally integrated model,
with no specialized classes.
Budget Committee 3 19 May 1998
d) Riverview Alternative Elementary School
Spokesperson: Ellen Adelberg
Ellen Adelberg spoke on behalf of the families who make use of the Lighthouse Program. She
noted that parents are proposing a workable alternative and asked for the Board's assistance in making
arrangements for running before and after school care programs in the schools, on a cost recovery basis.
Ms. Adelberg noted that discussions have been initiated with a community -based child care agency
with regard to administering such a program and that a solution must be in place by 25 June to allow
parents to make plans for next year.
Ms. Adelberg listed the reasons for continuing before and after school care programs, including
the fact that these programs offer a safe and affordable option for parents and are seen as a lifeline.
Without them, parents may opt to leave the system. Ms. Adelberg noted the effort which has been
expended in developing these programs and pointed out that jobs would also be lost, if they were
discontinued.
Ms. Adelberg advised that there are at least 12 before and after school care programs running as
part of the Lighthouse Program and at least 20 others which are not part of Lighthouse. Over 500
children are enrolled and some schools have waiting lists. Parent fees currently cover the costs of these
programs, excluding the Lighthouse Community Education Coordinators (CECs) who are employed by
the OCDSB. It is proposed that the programs continue, without the services of the CECs, and with
parent fees adjusted, if necessary, to cover the cost of administering the programs.
Ms. Adelberg asked the Board to continue to provide access to school space and to direct staff to
work with interested parents to plan and implement the continuation of before and after care programs
in OCDSB schools.
Trustee Scott asked whether the costs for the use of space have been included in the estimated
savings arising from discontinuation of the Lighthouse program (Section 13, folio 25). Superintendent
Stollery noted that the program has always run on a cost recovery basis, with the exception of the costs
associated with the Community Education Coordinators and central coordination. She requested that
this issue be referred to the Education Committee to be examined in more detail as it does not impact
the budget. Superintendent Stollery advised that staff would attempt to provide further information
for the Education Committee meeting of 26 March 1998.
A comment that the Business Services Committee appears to be a more appropriate forum for
discussion, given that the issues to be addressed relate in part to insurance and legal liabilities, was
noted. The matter will be pursued.
e) Ottawa - Carleton Secondary School Administrators' Network
Spokespersons: Lily Schooley and Marcia Reynolds
The Chair noted that the delegation withdrew late this afternoon.
f) Ottawa - Carleton Elementary Principals' Association
Spokespersons: Bob Douglas and Janet Castle Co- Presidents
Bob Douglas noted that the Ottawa - Carleton Elementary Principals' Association strongly
believes that the success of schools is based on a strong administrative /leadership team. The presence
of this team, which should include a principal and vice - principal, is essential if schools are to be safe
places for all students and staff and are to provide an education of the highest order. Mr. Douglas
suggested that the allocation of 60 vice - principal positions, as proposed in the staff - recommended
budget, be increased to ensure that all schools, even the smallest, are provided with such a team.
Budget Committee 4 19 May 1998
U Mr. Douglas submitted that a vice - principal is needed in every school to ensure the safety of
students and help fulfill the curriculum leadership function. Further, a full -time teaching vice -
principal cannot do justice to either job. Having a vice - principal in every school also provides a large
cadre of trainees from which principal vacancies can be filled. While the proposal to have a principal
in every school may seem expensive, the OCEPA believes the added value is worth the investment.
In response to a number of trustee queries, Mr. Douglas advised that the current allotment in
former CBE elementary schools ranges from .25 in the smaller schools to a full -time vice - principal in
the larger schools. Every school has a vice - principal with some administrative time. While some of
the former OBE elementary schools have 1.5 vice - principal positions, this is not the case in smaller
schools. Mr. Douglas also noted that his comments pertaining to the safety of students were based on
past experience. He noted that there have been incidents in some schools when the principal has been
out of the school.
With regard to a question at an earlier Budget Committee meeting regarding the possibility of
.25 increments in the allocation formula, Superintendent Rachlis noted that while it was initially
believed that implementing such a model would complicate staffing, a model has now been developed
whereby such an approach would be feasible. The proposed new model is based on the same number of
full -time equivalents, distributed differently.
Mr. Douglas maintained that, because of the lack of flex time, the current practice in former
CBE schools whereby vice - principals were provided with administrative time through creative
strategies and the cooperation of the teaching staff, would no longer be possible.
Debate on Amendments to the 1998 -99 Budget
Trustee Graham referred members to the memorandum provided this evening which re- orders
proposed amendments to allow the Committee to deal with them in an efficient manner. The motions
have been grouped to deal with those which would see reductions in the staff - recommended budget
first. Once it is clear what funds are available, additions to the staff recommended budget can be
considered.
At the request of the Chair, Superintendent Clarke provided an update on the status of funding
for capital debt. He noted that a memorandum from the Minister, dated 14 May 1998, indicates that
the Ministry has assumed the responsibility for school boards' debt service costs over the next three
years. The $1,322,990 which was not eligible for grant and which will now be covered, relates to the
payment of principal and interest for the following projects: Hopewell, Sawmill Creek Phase 2,
Bridlewood North, John McCrae, Cumberland and West Carleton (Budget Binder, Section 8, folio 1).
The total debt for these projects is $18,122,130 (Section 8, folio 7). The Minister's memo also indicates
that following the three year period, school boards will be able to include these debt service costs in
their annual calculation of the funding entitlement under the Pupil Accommodation Grant.
Superintendent Clarke explained that while the Hopewell project was not approved by the
Ministry, the reference in the memo from the Deputy Minister of 14 May 1998, to debt incurred for
capital commitments that had been made as of 14 May 1998 appears to indicate that this project will be
covered. Staff is seeking clarification. If the answer is in the affirmative, the Board may also wish to
rethink the manner in which it funds the Hilson project. There has been no indication that the
Ministry is prepared to take steps to address the cost of interim borrowing due to the quarterly payment
of the tax levy by municipalities.
Copies of the memoranda from the Ministry will be distributed to non - voting representatives.
The Committee proceeded to consider the proposed amendments that would produce savings
over the staff - recommended budget (all references are to the memorandum, dated 19 May 1998, from
Trustee Lynn Graham):
Budget Committee 5 19 May 1998
1. School Administration
Amendment 1A
Trustee Chambers presented the following revised motion:
a) THAT the elementary vice - principal release time allotment be maintained at the
1997 -98 level of 45.75 FTE (a reduction of 14.25 F.T.E.) and
b) THAT the secondary vice - principal release time allotment be reduced by 5 F.T.E.
Trustee Chambers noted that the motion as worded allows staff to come up with an appropriate
model within the stated parameters. This approach would ensure that the Board would not be putting
more vice - principals into the system this year, only to have to take them out the following year when
schools are closed.
In response to queries, Superintendent Vair clarified that the staff - recommended budget
proposed an elementary vice - principal allocation of 55 F.T.E. at the elementary level, plus a reserve of
5 F.T.E., for a total of 60 F.T.E., an increase of 14.25 over the current allocation of 45.75.
With regard to the model which is currently under consideration by senior staff, Superintendent
Rachlis noted that the elementary vice - principal allocation would be capped at 1; schools with fewer
than 250 would not have a vice - principal. Eight of the largest former OBE schools would be impacted
as they currently have a 1.5 vice - principal allocation. Increments of .25 would be possible.
Trustee Graham suggested that parts a) and b) of the motion be addressed separately. At the
request of Committee members, the Chair allowed questions of clarification on motion 1A as well as on
related motions 1B and 1C.
In response to queries, Superintendent Clarke noted that the cost of the proposed increase of
14.25 elementary vice - principal F.T.E. is $1,118,141 (Budget Binder, Section 2, folio 6). An increase of 5
secondary vice - principal F.T.E. positions would cost approximately $400,000 (Section 2, folio 8). With
respect to the feasibility of providing cost estimates for reducing vice - principal positions to ensure that
there is no surplus in the system as of September 1999, Superintendent Vair noted the difficulty in
anticipating the number of school closures and calculating the resulting savings. While it is clear that
for each school closed, there will be one less principal, the number of vice - principal positions which
would no longer be needed would depend on which schools are closed and the number of schools closed.
Staff confirmed that schools are functioning well with their current administrative
complement. Staff also clarified that individuals appointed to vice - principal positions are not
members of the federation regardless of how much time they spend teaching. All vice - principals
receive vice - principal pay, irrespective of the administrative time allocation. In the past, in
elementary schools, when the principal was absent and there was no vice - principal, a teacher was
designated as being in charge. At the secondary level, an administrative head or department head
may have been designated. Under current conditions, some difficulties may be anticipated with this
approach.
Superintendent Vair advised that currently there are 96 elementary vice - principal positions in
the system with release time of 45.75 F.T.E. Savings would be derived from reductions in release time
and in the number of vice - principals. The staff - recommended budget proposed release time of 60 F.T.E.
(112 positions). This would have required that 60 teachers be hired. With 96, there are 16 fewer
positions and 14.5 fewer teachers will be required. Superintendent Vair also noted that 27 -28
elementary principals are eligible for the enhanced early retirement factor from OMERS. To date, not
all have indicated their intentions.
With regard to the rationale for the staff proposal to increase the number of elementary vice -
principals, Superintendent Vair noted that currently former OBE schools with fewer than 20 teaching
Budget Committee 6 19 May 1998
Ia.
staff have no vice - principal. Under the staff proposal, all but the eight smallest schools would have
been allocated a vice - principal. Superintendent Rachlis noted that principals and vice - principals are
no longer part of the federation and teaching staff have been advised not to assume administrative
duties. A strong school administrative team was, therefore, seen to be necessary. The school
administration has also assumed additional responsibilities with more involvement in school councils
and in curriculum development and implementation. Schools are also being held more and more
accountable. Vice - principal positions are also seen as a training ground for principalships, a factor
which has assumed added importance, given the anticipated number of retirements in the near future.
In reply to further questions, Superintendent Rachlis concurred that safety issues, together with
the proposed reduction in custodial staff and the possibility of a decrease in supervision by teachers,
constitute further reasons for strengthening the administrative team.
Staff confirmed that in developing the allocation model, demographics were to be taken into
account. Five elementary vice - principal F.T.E. positions were to be held in reserve for special needs.
In response to queries regarding the manner in which the question of surplus vice - principals
would be addressed, staff advised that this issue is slated for discussion at the Human Resources
Committee meeting of 20 May 1998. The Board would have certain obligations to vice - principals if
schools were closed.
With regard to harmonization under the current allocation, the Director noted two options:
maintaining the current allocation without addressing the equity issue; or, if the Board so directs,
moving ahead with regard to an equitable allocation within the current overall total. Stan Currie,
non - voting representative for OCASC, suggested that it would be helpful if the Board clarified its
intent in this regard.
Trustee Jackson noted that the staff proposal represents a 30% increase in site -based
administration. He pointed out that all employees are being asked to take on an increased workload
and that responsibility for safety must be shared by everyone in the school.
Trustee Getty queried the impact on schools such as Sir Guy Carleton and McArthur of reducing
the staff - recommended allocation of secondary panel vice - principals by five. The Director noted that
if staff were directed to exclude these schools from reductions, this would be possible.
Dave Wildman noted that the elementary teachers' federation believes that there should be a
vice - principal in every school with administrative release time to deal with parents and provide
support for classroom teachers as well as for the principal. The presence of a vice - principal in
intermediate schools to deal appropriately with discipline issues is also most important. While it is
recognized that the vice - principal allocation is to be funded from the administration envelope, the
support provided has a direct impact on the classroom.
In reply to further questions, the Director noted that the EIC has not yet initiated the
consultation process with regard to the role of principals and vice - principals. It appears that it will be
tied to the consultation on school councils. Following consultation, the EIC will be developing draft
roles and responsibilities. While more concrete information is not anticipated until late fall, it is
unlikely that the Ministry will be determining the number of principals and vice - principals to be
allocated to schools.
With regard to the secondary panel, staff clarified that the staff - recommended budget
proposes a secondary vice - principal administrative time allocation of 52.0 F.T.E. (Section 2, folio 8).
The proposed amendment would reduce this allocation to 47.0. Currently the total secondary vice -
principal /administrative head allocation to schools is 52.0 (34.0 vice - principals and 18.0
administrative heads).
The total dollar value of the savings if parts a) and b) of the amendment were approved,
amounts to approximately $15M.
Budget Committee 7 19 May 1998
l�.
Trustee Chambers noted that part a) of the motion clearly identifies a significant sum which
could be used elsewhere in the system. He submitted that it should be possible to function
appropriately with the current complement of vice - principals and considered that harmonization
should proceed in areas where it can be implemented quickly.
Following discussion, part a) of the motion carried.
Trustee Morse moved THAT part b) of the amendment be amended as follows:
THAT the secondary vice - principal release time allotment be reduced by 3 F.T.E. so that
secondary schools with enrolments of fewer than 700 would have 1 principal and 1 vice -
principal, with the exception of Sir Guy Carleton S.S. and McArthur H.S.
Trustee Morse considered it important to provide adequate support for vocational schools. She
pointed out that all secondary schools will have two vice - principals with the exception of the three
small schools which will have one.
Director Lane clarified that the staff - recommended budget proposed an increase of 18 secondary
vice - principals with a corresponding decrease in the number of administrative heads. The amendment
proposed a reduction of 5 to 13; the sub - amendment proposes reducing the 18 by 3, leaving 15. The three
schools with enrolments under 700 are Cairine Wilson, Osgoode Township and Ridgemont. These
schools would have a principal and a vice - principal and no administrative head. All other secondary
schools would be staffed by a principal and two vice - principals. Currently there is an administrative
team of three in every secondary school, a principal, a vice - principal and either a second vice -
principal or an administrative head.
Director Lane also explained that while administrative heads may assume duties which are
carried out by vice - principals elsewhere, they are not vice - principals. Some may not hold principal
qualifications. Further, they are members of the federation. The difference in salary between a vice -
principal and an administrative head is about $6,000.
It was clarified that the reference in the Budget Binder, Section 2, folio 8 to 17.34 positions
relates to department heads, not administrative heads.
Trustees opposed to the sub - amendment noted that the number of positions should not be
increased in areas where it is known that redundancies will occur.
Trustees supporting the sub - amendment submitted that the increasing difficulties in managing
schools warrant the salary differential for vice - principals. They also agreed that an exemption to the
formula should be made for vocational schools.
The sub - amendment carried. The amendment, as amended, also carried, viz:
a) THAT the elementary vice - principal release time allotment be maintained at the
1997 -98 level of 45.75 FTE (a reduction of 14.25 F.T.E.) and
b) THAT the secondary vice - principal release time allotment be reduced by 3 F.T.E. so
that secondary schools with enrolments of fewer than 700 would have 1 principal and 1
vice - principal, with the exception of Sir Guy Carleton S.S. and McArthur H.S.
Trustee Scott noted that proposed amendment 1B had been subsumed. Trustee Libbey withdrew
proposed amendment 1C.
The Committee took a short recess.
budget (:omnuttee 8 19 May 1998
/4.
2. Special Education
Amendment 2A
Trustee Libbey moved as follows:
THAT the elementary congregated gifted program of the former OBE be permitted to continue in
1998 -99, but that it not be expanded to the former CBE schools for 1998 -99.
Superintendent Clarke noted that originally staff considered that the $380,000 required for
transportation for extending the elementary congregated gifted program could be contained within the
budget, based on anticipated savings in transportation of $1.1M (Budget Binder, Section 13, folio 19);
however, the Ottawa - Carleton Catholic School Board's announcement that it could not make changes
in school start times for the 1998 -99 school year results in a reduction of $300,000 to $800,000. Thus, if
the amendment is approved, no savings will be realized but the $300,000 shortfall will be covered.
Trustee Hill requested clarification on the cost of the congregated gifted program, exclusive of
transportation. Superintendent Turriff explained that classes are staffed at 25:1. In terms of actual
staffing, congregated gifted classes do not cost more. With regard to where students in the program
would come from, staff advised that they would be drawn from their community schools. At this point,
it is not known which children would be eligible.
Trustee Libbey noted that trustees will be reviewing all programs in the next few months.
Accordingly, he considered an expansion of the program to be premature. He also referred to concerns
expressed by parents that the gifted program is being expanded while other special education programs
are being cut back.
Trustee Scott expressed strong support for congregated gifted programs and stressed that there is
a similar range of needs among identified gifted students as for other exceptionalities. She pointed out
(W that the range of services provided for gifted pupils has been restricted and that while some students
do well in a regular class with withdrawal, others require a congregated class. She agreed, however,
that it would be imprudent to expand the elementary congregated program until the number of students
and the manner in which they can best be served have been clearly identified.
Other trustees concurred that expanding the program at this time is inappropriate. A concern
was also expressed about the additional transportation costs. Trustee Chambers noted that there are
three distinct transportation zones within the Board's jurisdiction - within the greenbelt, outside the
greenbelt and the rural areas, and that any model for dealing with gifted students should reflect those
three zones. Further, three age groups are involved: primary, junior and intermediate. He considered a
careful look at the intermediate grades to be warranted.
Stan Currie, non - voting representative for OCASC, considered that the Board is obligated to
provide a range of services, including integration with appropriate supports. He noted, however, that
there is insufficient time left prior to the next school year to determine what is best for students and to
identify the criteria for identification.
Jane Berman, non - voting representative for SEAC, noted that while she supported the intent,
implementation in such short timelines would pose serious problems. She considered that SEAC should
play a proactive role in the process and that the social and educational needs of students should be
taken into account. She expressed the hope that staff would be flexible and that as space becomes
available, opportunities would be maximized. She pointed out that some parents are willing to forego
transportation to gain access to the program and stressed the importance of providing appropriate
supports for gifted students whose needs would be met through an integrated approach.
In response to queries as to why senior staff chose to harmonize the congregated gifted program,
the Director noted that the driving principle was the issue of equity. Senior staff recognized that it
was possible to expand the program without adding major costs and that many of the students would
Budget Committee 9 19 May 1998
have been transported, at any rate. With respect to accommodating former CBE students in the current
program, the Director confirmed that staff would look at ways to provide access for students who would
benefit. Certain constraints, such as the size of the school and the inability to hire additional staff
unless there is a full class complement, must be taken into account.
Trustee Morse asked for assurances that the necessary planning and background studies will be
carried out in the coming year. Superintendent Turriff confirmed that this would occur as part of the
development of a new comprehensive plan and the review of all programs and services. Superintendent
Morse also noted a concern regarding the different entry points. In the former OBE, entry occurred in
Grade 1 while in the former CBE, entry occurred in Grade 4. She queried how the situation would be
handled if a student were placed in a congregated gifted program in Grade 1 and the entry point was
subsequently changed. The Director noted that it is possible to have a student in a congregated class one
year and in a regular class the next. While most boards start the gifted program at Grade 4, they also
have some classes for gifted students at risk. It is highly likely that the Board would continue to have
a small number of gifted students in the primary grades who would require a congregated setting.
Staff confirmed that if the amendment failed, the existing program in former OBE schools will
continue and withdrawal will still be provided elsewhere.
Trustee Hill noted that the congregated approach does not cost more. She pointed out that the
program has been in place in the former OBE for a number of years and it would be relatively easy to
adopt similar strategies, if the number of classes is increased. She submitted that congregated classes
are provided for other exceptionalities and that gifted students should be treated in a similar manner.
She pointed to the drop -out rate for the gifted population and the potential for disruption if students'
needs are not appropriately met. She suggested, however, that transportation should only be provided
for students in Grades 1 -6.
Trustee Scott requested assurances that gifted students are included in the list of exceptional
pupils, that identification does not have to wait until the mass screening at the end of Grade 3 and that
once a student is identified, programming will be provided. Director Lane confirmed that this would be Vj
the case and noted that the new regulations clearly indicate that this is the intent. Further, parents
can now have much more involvement.
Trustee Bled queried the availability of non - anecdotal evidence which would support the
contention that gifted students in the former CBE are not receiving the services they need to develop to
their full potential and submitted that the gifted program should be considered in the overall context
of the comprehensive plan. With regard to the estimated transportation costs, staff advised that the
$380,000 in costs relates to transportation for Grades 1 -8. Jane Berman indicated that the fact that
former CBE parents purchased service from the former OBE is evidence that other placements and
programming are needed. Trustee Scott also advised that the former CBE carried out an evaluative
study about five years ago and a report is available.
Trustee Libbey pointed to the impact on students remaining in the regular classroom when gifted
students are withdrawn. He recalled that Dr. Offord in his recent presentation to the Education
Committee, did not generally agree with congregating gifted students and that the presence of gifted
students brings up the grading for the entire class. He submitted that programming has always been
provided and that the province supports an integrated approach. He considered that this matter
should be dealt with as a programming issue.
Following discussion, the amendment carried.
It was noted that Amendment 2B had been subsumed.
P]
tsuaget Committee 10 19 May 1998
/6.
3. Transportation
Amendment 3A
Trustee Chambers moved as follows:
THAT all transportation entitlements be cancelled for secondary school students within the
areas served by OC Transpo, with the exception of those students defined as being in financial
need or those students whose special needs require special transportation services, for estimated
savings of $300,000. (Note - students with financial needs would be provided bus passes on a
harmonized ten months basis.)
Trustee Chambers noted that the intent of the motion is to achieve harmonization in
transportation entitlements, beginning this year with Grade 9.to OAC. He pointed out that OC Transpo
has indicated that with some changes, it is possible to accommodate students travelling to and from
school.
Trustee Morse spoke against the amendment. She pointed out that it was staff's intention to
consider harmonization of the transportation policies after budget deliberations had been completed.
She submitted that it is unfair to target a particular group without prior assessment, particularly given
the decision not to adopt this approach for other groups. She also pointed to the time students would
have to spend on buses, the lack of direct routes to schools and the absence of assurances from OC
Transpo that additional riders can be accommodated.
Trustee Hill moved in amendment to the amendment:
THAT all transportation entitlements be cancelled for Grade 7 to OAC within areas served by
OC Transpo.
Trustee Hill maintained that Grade 7 students are capable of travelling via OC Transpo and
pointed out that exceptions could be made for students for whom access via public transportation would
not be feasible.
In response to queries, staff advised that additional savings of $50,000 would be realized, if
the proposed sub - amendment were implemented. Senior staff did not recommend any changes to
transportation entitlements as it was considered that sufficient savings could be achieved through
cooperation with the co- terminous board and changes to school start times.
Trustees speaking against the sub - amendment cited the absence of direct routes to schools, the
time students would spend on buses in addition to the distance travelled and safety concerns. The
increase in the number of cars arriving at schools was also highlighted. A concern about the potential
for students to drop out of school was also noted.
The sub - amendment failed.
Trustee Norm MacDonald submitted that OC Transpo would not be able to accommodate the
number of Barrhaven students travelling to inner Nepean schools and moved in amendment to the
amendment:
THAT the words "inside the greenbelt" be added after OC Transpo.
Trustee Norm MacDonald subsequently withdrew the sub - amendment.
Discussion reverted to the amendment.
Superintendent Clarke clarified that providing bus passes to financially disadvantaged
students for ten months would add costs of about $95,000. Trustee Chambers noted that the $300,000
figure represents net savings.
Budget Committee 11 19 May 1998
i7.
Trustee Morse moved in amendment to the amendment to add the following:
THAT all transportation entitlements be cancelled for secondary school students within the
areas served by CC Transpo, who live less than four km. from their designated school, with
the exception of ...
Trustee Scott noted that the policies of both predecessor boards stipulate that the walking
distance for secondary students is 4 km. The sub - amendment would therefore appear to be redundant.
The sub - amendment failed. Discussion reverted to the amendment.
In reply to queries, Director Lane clarified that the Education Act indicates that school boards
cannot enforce attendance for students for whom transportation is not provided who live more than 4.8
km. from school.
Trustees speaking in favour of the amendment submitted that secondary students should be
required to use public transportation. Trustee Hill pointed to overall transportation costs of $23M and
maintained that the money should be directed to other important areas such as guidance counsellors,
special education staffing and custodial services. She considered that exceptions could be made
without having to write policy.
Those speaking against the amendment considered it inappropriate to be setting transportation
policy through amendments to the staff - recommended budget and noted the importance of giving
careful thought to a harmonized approach. The importance of considering the time required for travel
as well as distance was noted.
Staff advised that if the amendment were passed, no circumstances other than those explicitly
referenced in the amendment would be accommodated. Otherwise the expected savings of $300,000
would not be realized.
Trustee Chambers submitted that OC Transpo will not provide adequate service unless the
Board provides riders. He noted that change will have to occur and that beginning with students in
Grades 9 to OAC would be an appropriate starting point. He also maintained that the current policies
of the predecessor boards are inequitable and that some former OBE students are travelling
considerable distances to access programs. Trustee Scott took exception to Trustee Chambers' remarks,
noting that similar conditions apply to some former CBE students who live in outlying areas.
The amendment was defeated.
4. Staff Development
Amendment 4A
Trustee Chambers moved:
THAT the staff - proposed budget be amended to continue the current level of funding for
staff development for estimated savings of $200,609.
Trustee Chambers noted that this is one of the few areas where staff have proposed an
increase. While the rationale is understandable, he queried whether the Board could afford this
initiative.
Superintendent Mason referred to Report No. 98 -83, "Conceptual Framework for Staff
Development in the OCDSB ", which was presented to the Human Resources Committee at its meeting
of 6 April 1998. The plan comprises three major components: staff development, the selection of staff to
positions of responsibility and the supervision and evaluation of staff. The request for an increase of
$200,000 reflects the magnitude of the task. Superintendent Mason confirmed that the four positions
Budget Committee 12 19 May 1998
represent an increase in the establishment. He stressed the importance of hiring individuals who are
familiar with the needs of the Board. Currently the office comprises one principal, one Personnel
(W Officer and one secretary. The increased complement of seven would include one principal of staff
development, three coordinators and three secretarial positions.
Trustees supporting the amendment questioned the need for four additional staff when the
number of staff is being cut significantly and suggested that training could be obtained in other ways,
including through continuing education courses, after hours, on a cost recovery basis, etc. They
considered that the money should be directed to other areas of greater need.
Trustees opposed to the motion stressed the need for professional development, particularly in
these times of massive change when individuals will be taking up new responsibilities and tasks. They
noted that a commitment to professional development reflects the value attributed to staff.
Superintendent Mason explained that a number of the training opportunities will be provided
after hours, some on a cost recovery basis. The Staff Development Office will collaborate with
Educational Services /Curriculum Services with regard to offering courses related to instructional
practices, evaluation of student achievement practices, etc.
With regard to the funding model, the Director noted that Ministry officials have indicated
that the amount built into the formula for staff development covers the full range, including curriculum.
An amount of $982,000 is included in the funding formula for staff development. The Director clarified
that staff development initiatives will be directed to all employee groups, not just academic staff.
The amendment was defeated.
Community Use of Schools Office
Amendment 5A
Trustee Chambers moved:
THAT the funding for the Community Use of Schools Office be reduced by $76,000.
Trustee Chambers submitted that the Community Use of Schools (CUS) Office should be able to
manage with reduced resources. He considered the decentralized model which was followed by the
former OBE to be a workable practice and pointed to concerns expressed in the community regarding a
centralized approach. Trustee Chambers expressed the view that the savings realized through
reduced resources in this area should be applied to retaining the position of Volunteer Coordinator.
Trustee opposed to the motion cited the need for consistency and the additional workload on
school office staff should a decentralized approach be followed. They also noted that a reduction of
$76,000 represents a significant portion of the total CUS office budget.
Superintendent Stollery advised that the total budget is approximately $150,000 for four full-
time employees. She pointed out that there are significant differences across the new board in the way
community use has operated. In the former CBE, community use has been very extensive as there were
very few municipal facilities. Some of the school projects which are currently underway are continuing
the practice of building in partnership with municipalities. The CUS office is undertaking a complete
study of this area so that an accurate picture of costs can be obtained.
The amendment was defeated.
Budget Committee 13 19 May 1998
� 6. Custodial Services
Amendment 6A
Trustee Sheryl MacDonald moved;
THAT the Site Supervisor positions be eliminated for savings of $576,000.
Trustee Sheryl MacDonald submitted that site supervisors are costly and represent an added
and unnecessary layer of management. She suggested that custodians could report to principals and
considered that the money saved by eliminating site supervisor positions could be better used to address
concerns in the community about reductions to custodial staff.
In response to queries, Superintendent Clarke noted that the staff - recommended budget called
for a reduction of 10 site supervisors from the current complement of 20, based on a families of schools
concept. Ten was considered to be the minimum number required to ensure that the system operated
smoothly. Site supervisors coordinate all custodians, move personnel in cases of emergency and ensure
that the work is carried out as specified. With the proposed reduction to ten, principals will have to
take on more of the day -to -day supervision.
Trustees opposed to the motion noted an increase in the quality of care schools have been
receiving since the shift to site supervisors. They also noted that it is unreasonable to expect principals
to take on the added responsibility of supervising custodial staff, particularly when this extends
beyond their own schools. Further, principals should act as educational leaders and may not have the
expertise required. Trustees also cited safety issues and did not consider it appropriate to make further
cuts to custodial services staff.
Trustee Chambers moved in amendment to the amendment:
THAT an additional three site supervisor positions be eliminated for savings of $173,000.
Trustee Chambers considered seven to be an appropriate number, based on one per
superintendency and pointed to anticipated closures of facilities next year.
In response to queries, Superintendent Clarke advised that currently custodians report to the
site supervisor. The principal is seen as the client. He noted that the senior staff recommendation was
based on geography, potential school closures and the recognition that the upcoming evaluation of
facilities will require the assistance of staff who are familiar with the various sites. There are
individuals in similar positions in the former OBE, although they have different titles.
Superintendent Vair confirmed that further reductions in staff would have severance implications.
Trustees opposed to the motion considered site supervisors to be a vital link and did not consider
seven to be an adequate number.
The sub - amendment carried. The amendment, as amended, also carried.
7. Elementary Alternative Schools
Amendment 7A
Trustee Morse moved:
THAT the Board discontinue all alternative elementary schools for September 1998 for a
savings of approximately $13M.
(Trustee Morse withdrew part b) of the amendment which related to designating the sites as
surplus space.)
Budget Committee 14 19 May 1998
moo.
Trustee Morse pointed to the significant costs associated with alternative schools and
maintained that there is very little difference between the program offered and that provided in other
(W Board schools. She noted that parents elect to send their children to this program through choice, not
because these children have not been successful elsewhere.
Superintendent Stollery explained that the concept of the alternative school was developed by
interested parents who wanted a more active role in working with the school. She confirmed that, in
accordance with sound pedagogical practice, parents should be involved in decision - making and
discussions about curriculum at all schools. Further details regarding development of alternative
schools are contained in a report submitted to the Education Committee for information on 30 March.
In response to queries, staff clarified that the $1.3M covers five principals ($437,000), 7.5 office
staff ($244,000), 10.6 custodians ($319,000), utilities for five buildings ($173,000) and transportation
($220,000), less an offset of $87,000 for mothballing. With regard to the disposition of schools if these
programs were no longer offered, Trustee Morse noted that this would be decided through the area
review process. Director Lane noted that the anticipated savings of $1.3M would only be realized if
these schools were closed.
Trustees opposed to the motion considered it unfair to target a particular area prior to the area
review. While they noted that the pedagogical approach practiced in alternative schools should
prevail in all schools, they submitted that it would be unfair to close these programs without
appropriate notice. Some trustees submitted that alternative schools are different and offer a less
structured approach. Trustee Hill commented that alternative schools are particularly well suited to
special needs students. Trustee Scott noted that there does not appear to be any information suggesting
that the number of identified students is higher in alternative schools.
Trustee Scott moved in amendment to the amendment:
THAT the Board discontinue transportation for alternative schools for 1998 -99 for savings of
$220,000.
In response to a query, staff clarified that the figure of $220,000 represents the cost for the bus
routes to alternative schools. It does not represent net savings.
Trustees opposed to the sub - amendment considered it unfair to target one program and recalled
the decision not to put any programs at risk by cancelling transportation. They submitted that
cancelling transportation at this date would, in fact, have that effect and that this program should be
considered along with all other non - mandated programs during the upcoming review.
Staff confirmed that a significant reduction in enrolment at alternative schools can be
anticipated if transportation is cancelled. Currently the only changes in the budget related to
transportation involve changes to school opening and closing times.
The sub - amendment failed. Discussion reverted to the amendment.
Trustees opposed to the amendment considered any change at this point to be premature. It was
noted that repatriating these students to their home schools could have other implications, including
overcrowding. Trustee Chambers voiced a concern that cancelling alternative programs would give rise
to a strong demand for charter schools. Others felt that the alternative schools are different in
atmosphere and in structure and in the level of volunteerism.
In reply to a question, the Director noted that while some other Board schools have a similar
philosophy, one of the differences is multi-age groupings.
With respect to whether the amendment is contrary to the Board motion of 30 April not to close
schools, the Director noted that the Board could discontinue all alternative elementary programs and
maintain the schools as community schools, without contravening the Board motion.
Budget Committee 15 19 May 1998
Trustee Morse maintained that there is nothing distinctive about alternative schools, that no
boundary changes are required and that all of these children have home schools.
The amendment was defeated.
8. Motions that do not add or subtract money from the Budget and
Motions that deal with unrealized savings or revenues
Trustee Libbey disagreed that motion 3 pertaining to the $1.3M in interest costs related to late
payments from the municipalities and motion 4 regarding the delivery model for Junior Kindergarten do
not impact the budget. He submitted that these should be considered as motions that would produce
savings.
Trustee Libbey also gave notice of an amendment to increase the staff complement in the
Research and Planning Office.
The meeting adjourned at 1.25 a.m., Wednesday, 20 May 1998.
Lynn Graham
Chair
Budget Committee
PI
Budget Committee 16 19 May 1998