Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11b Budget 21 & 22 May 1998 Minutes PublicOTTAWA - CARLETON DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD BUDGET COMMITTEE MINUTES 21 May 1998 A meeting of the Budget Committee was held this evening in the Board Room, 133 Greenbank Road, Nepean, commencing at 7.00 p.m. with Trustee Graham in the Chair and the following also in attendance: TRUSTEES: Cynthia Bled, Albert Chambers, Alex Getty, Patty -Anne Hill, 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 John Brennan, Superintendent of School Services Michael Carlon, Superintendent of School Services Marie- Louise Chartrand, Comptroller of Finance Ann Houlden, Principal, Sir Guy Carleton S.S. Laura McAlister, Principal, Special Education Carol Lithwick, Manager of Special Services Terry Laughlin, Chief, Psychological Services Dan Wiseman, Chief of Social Work Donna Warren- Maxwell, Manager of Physical Planning & Transportation. 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: Nancy Myers, Special Education Advisory Committee, alternate Janice Ritchie, Ottawa - Carleton Assembly of School Councils, alternate Call to Order /Approval of Agenda Trustee Libbey moved that the agenda be approved, subject to re- ordering the amendments he had submitted as a package, as follows: Budget Committee 1 21 & 22 May 1998 3. a) Amendment 3 ($1.3M in interest costs related to late payments from the municipalities) to follow Amendment 1A (use of year -end surplus); b) Amendment 4 (savings derived from JK delivery model) to follow Amendment 3 above; C) Amendment 6A (secondary alternate programs) to follow Amendments 1A -1E (special education); d) Amendment 3A (equipment replacement) to follow Amendment 10 (Research & Planning and Program & Student Evaluation); e) Amendment 7A (school renovations) to follow Amendment 3A above. In response to queries regarding amendment b), the Director noted that the staff - recommended budget proposes that the entire Learning Opportunities Grant be used to assist students at risk. The specifics have not yet been determined. Amendments a) through e) were voted on separately and carried. Trustee Hill moved THAT Amendment 5A (outdoor education centres) be addressed first to accommodate those in the public gallery. Trustees opposed to the amendment noted that there were people in the public gallery who were interested in other areas. They also considered that the process which the Committee had agreed to whereby amendments would be grouped into categories and dealt with in the order received within each category, should be followed. Trustee Hill's amendment was defeated. Trustee Morse moved THAT the agenda be amended to provide for a short in camera session to discuss staffing issues immediately following the delegations. The amendment was defeated. It was noted that a motion to move in camera could be brought forward at any time during the meeting. Following discussion, the agenda, as amended, was approved. Distribution of Minutes of 12 and 14 May 1998 Trustee Graham noted that the minutes of 12 May and 14 May were distributed this evening and would be confirmed at the Board meeting of 25 May 1998. Public Ouestion Period a ) Sally McIntyre queried the potential financial implications should the Board reverse its earlier decision to fund Junior Kindergarten. Superintendent Clarke advised that the level of funding would be the same, regardless of whether the Board offered Junior Kindergarten across the jurisdiction or in some locations only. Portables will be relocated as required. Junior Kindergarten classes will be housed in the main building while the more senior grades will be moved to portables. Ms. McIntyre also asked whether the decision to fund Junior Kindergarten as opposed to funding special needs through the Early Learning Grant would provide all children with the best chance for quality education and whether this approach would be sustainable over the next three years. Superintendent Stollery noted that senior staff's recommendation to expand Junior Kindergarten was made after considerable deliberation. A number of factors were taken into consideration, including the research which indicates that the earlier children begin their education, the greater their chance for success. Senior staff believe the delivery of a Junior Kindergarten program across the jurisdiction to be sustainable. uuuget %.omuurree 2 21 & 99 May 1998 With regard to the measures staff will be taking to evaluate the impacts of budgetary decisions (W on special needs students, Superintendent Turriff noted that the Board will continue the practice of an annual review of all 1PRC students to assess progress towards the items listed in the Individual Education Plan (IEP). Information will also be available on the assistance provided through the Intensive Support Amount (ISA) grant. Over the next several months, work will continue on the development of the Special Education Comprehensive Plan, with input from all stakeholders, including trustees. Trustee Chambers queried the level of funding for Junior Kindergarten and the potential savings if the delivery model includes the use of Early Childhood Educators. Staff will respond. b) Geoff Sheppard, President, OPSTF, asked a number of questions related to the proposed delivery model for special education, with particular reference to the role of SERTs and teacher diagnosticians and the responsibility centre for educational assessments. Mr. Sheppard also asked how the needs of all exceptional students will be met with the proposed reduction in services. Superintendent Turriff confirmed that SERTs will have a number of responsibilities, including carrying out educational assessments, writing reports, attending all IPRCs, writing IEPs with the assistance of the classroom teacher, helping with classroom modifications and remedial teaching. At the elementary level, four SERT positions have been retained centrally to provide training and support. Students who require more intensive support than can be provided through in -class modifications will be directed to specialized classes. Staff are cognizant of the impact of reductions and will make every effort to meet the needs of students within the available resources. Superintendent Turriff also advised that, if trustees reinstate funds for staffing and services, the delivery model will be reviewed. The role of teacher diagnosticians and the question of who will be responsible for educational assessments will be addressed in that context. With regard to qualifications, the Ministry has indicated that Special Education, Part II, is the basic requirement. While staff are encouraged to become as qualified as possible, expecting all staff to obtain Part II immediately may be problematic. Consistency with regard to the quality of educational assessments would be achieved with the assistance of the central SERTs, through appropriate in- service and a focused plan. 4. Delegations re 1998 Budget Trustee Graham noted that five minutes would be allowed for each presentation and a further five minutes for questions from Committee members. a) . Elementary Office Administrators' Association Spokesperson: Hannah D'Ang_elo, President Hannah D'Angelo expressed concerns about the impact of the proposed reduction in school office staffing and highlighted the resulting risk to the safe environment which schools currently offer. Ms. D'Angelo pointed to the increased workload of office staff due to the downsizing which has occurred in previous years, coupled with increased responsibilities. She provided examples of the duties performed by office staff in the course of a typical day, many of which involve dealing directly with students. She submitted that the entire school is a classroom and urged the Board to maintain present staffing levels. b) Sir Guy Carleton Secondary School Council Sj2okesperson: Debby Corbin Debby Corbin expressed concerns about the impact of the staff - recommended budget on the special requirements of Sir Guy Carleton Secondary School. Ms. Corbin noted that the school offers Budget Committee 3 21 & 22 May 1998 basic /vocational education to all students across Ottawa - Carleton and enables students to lead successful, independent lives. She noted in particular the implications of reducing the number of Department Heads, eliminating Administrative Head positions and reducing the office staff and the guidance and SERU complements. All of these individuals play a critical role. Any reductions would diminish the school's ability to meet the needs of students which are both extensive and intensive. Ms. Corbin also pointed to safety considerations, if there is an increase in the pupil- teacher ratio, and the negative impact should overlay positions in co-operative education and ESL be removed and the number of teaching assistants and custodians be reduced. Ms. Corbin asked that the special requirements of Sir Guy Carleton be taken into account when budget decisions are made. In response to trustee queries regarding the ability to provide additional resources to support the program offered at Sir Guy Carleton, staff noted that while there are no provisions to increase the office staff complement, it may be possible to provide assistance in other areas. Superintendent Stollery referred members to a memo responding to earlier questions regarding the impact of the budget on Sir Guy Carleton and McArthur, indicating that no changes to the teaching program were planned for these schools. Trustee Chambers noted the reference in the delegation's written submission to the fact that the school has been audited and suggested that the information obtained be shared with trustees. Ann Houlden, Principal of Sir Guy Carleton, explained that the audit covered the leadership structure. This information is available on request. In reply to further questions, staff advised that basic /vocational education is offered at Sir Guy Carleton, McArthur and Laurentian. Laurentian is also considered to be a school with special requirements. C) Charles Merovitz, parent & Ryan Merovitz student Elizabeth Wyn Wood Charles Merovitz, the parent of a student at Elizabeth Wyn Wood, expressed support for the proposed amendment to maintain secondary alternate programs at independent sites. He noted that students in the program were not able to cope with the regular school setting and that the nurturing atmosphere will be lost if the programs are relocated. He also pointed to the crucial role of the social worker in contributing to the success of the program. Mr. Merovitz queried the rationale for relocating the program and noted that the anticipated savings would be offset by the reductions in grants resulting from an increase in the drop -out rate. Ryan Merovitz noted the importance of the program to his education and the success he has achieved since enrolling in the Alternate Program. He spoke of the teacher /student relationship and the "small town" atmosphere. Ryan noted that students enjoy themselves at the same time as they are learning and do not want to lose their community. In response to queries, Ryan noted that prior to attending Elizabeth Wyn Wood, his chances of obtaining employment were very low. He now believes that he has acquired skills which will enable him to gain employment. Trustee Getty thanked Mr. Merovitz for his presentation and asked staff to provide him with a copy of the memorandum distributed this evening regarding renovation costs if the Alternate Programs are moved. Superintendent Stollery pointed out that costs in the chart are approximate. Duaget Lommittee 4 21 & 99 May 1998 d) Dr. Tina Daniels Professor of Child Psychology, Carleton University Dr. Tina Daniels expressed concerns about the impact of eliminating the Children Learning for Living Program. Dr. Daniels noted that the goal of the program is to teach children to deal with conflict, an objective which has become increasingly important. She stressed that while it is possible to reduce violence and bullying, research indicates that early intervention is crucial. Further, all children must be targeted. Dr. Daniels submitted that the Children Learning for Living Program is a valuable resource for students' well-being and urged the Board to support the program both financially and philosophically. In response to trustee queries, Superintendent Turriff noted that staff are aware of the value of the program. The budget has forced staff to consider ways to integrate the program and a committee has been struck to review ways in which the curriculum can be used. Terry Laughlin, Chief, Psychological Services and Dan Wiseman, Chief of Social Work, confirmed that staff are looking at ways to continue the work which has been carried out through this program and will build on the initiatives of both predecessor boards in this area. Research has been carried out on the Children Learning for Living Program and the program's effectiveness has been validated. Dr. Daniels has participated in the research. In reply to questions regarding the importance of targeting all students, Dr. Daniels reiterated that it is critical to teach all students to deal with conflict. Staff confirmed that they are aware of the need for early intervention. e) -- Bill Mason Outdoor Education Centre Spokespersons: Heather Patterson and Mary O'Brien, West Carleton S.S. Students Heather Patterson and Mary O'Brien expressed concerns about the proposed closure of the Bill Mason and MacSkimming outdoor education centres. They stressed the importance of environmental education, highlighted the link with the new science curriculum and noted that the centres serve students throughout the system. The centres provide an opportunity for hands -on learning, teach students who visit the centre an understanding and respect for all life and allow students enrolled in environmental education courses the opportunity to develop leadership skills. The centres are, in fact, outdoor classrooms. Ms. Patterson and Ms. O'Brien referred to the proposal submitted by staff at the outdoor centres which would keep these sites open at a cost of $200,000. They urged the Board to maintain these valuable resources. In response to queries regarding a reference to a waiting list, Ms. Patterson noted that classes are currently full. With respect to providing opportunities for hands -on learning at other sites, e.g. the Log Farm, the Experimental Farm, etc., the students noted that the interpreters at the outdoor centres are specifically trained, allowing students to gain a great deal more than they might otherwise. Trustee Scott thanked the presenters and their supporters for coming and queried the impact on West Carleton students if the Bill Mason Centre is closed. The presenters noted that the Bill Mason Centre is an integral part of West Carleton S.S. A petition which was recently circulated in support of the centre was signed by 500 students. Students were shocked at the proposal to close the centre and were very concerned about the negative impact on their education. Trustees expressed support for the centres and noted the cost and the time which would be required to develop these centres if they were not already in place. Trustee Chambers queried the opportunities for cross - boundary transfers to allow secondary students access to courses in environmental education. Superintendent Stollery advised that this issue has not yet been discussed. Budget Committee 5 21 & 22 May 1998 27. f) Evan Diamond, John Adams, former CBE parents re 'gifted program models Evan Diamond and John Adams, former CBE parents, expressed concern at the decision not to expand the elementary congregated gifted program. They highlighted the special needs of gifted children and the detrimental effect of placing these children in non - congregated classes. They pointed to the research which indicates that the congregated approach is the best model for meeting the social and educational needs of gifted children at a reasonable cost. The presenters submitted that the congregated approach is less costly than an in- school withdrawal program. The pupil teacher ratio in congregated classes is the same and no extra support staff or equipment is required. Withdrawal requires the services of a SERU or SERT, thereby entailing additional costs. There is no indication in the budget that the savings which would be realized from offering a congregated program have been taken into account. The presenters also queried whether the cost estimates for transportation consider the substantial savings that would be realized if new congregated centres were optimally located. Further, the majority of parents in the congregated gifted program would be willing to consider modified transportation arrangements. The presenters maintained that the withdrawal program is not a substitute for congregated classes and that in -class enrichment is not being offered. They considered that the more than 1,500 gifted elementary students living in the former CBE jurisdiction should not be deprived of the clear benefits of the congregated program and should be provided with the opportunity to develop to their full potential. In response to queries regarding the calculation of costs, the presenters detailed the number of person hours which would be required to serve identified gifted students in the withdrawal program in Grades 4 to 8 in former CBE schools. Superintendent Turriff noted that no offsetting amounts for congregating gifted students were included in the staff - recommended budget, nor were any monies added when the decision was made not to expand the program. She pointed out that there are a number of ways in which gifted education can be offered and that there are models which do not require the services of a SERU or SERT. These decisions are made at the school level. 5. Update on Funding Prior to the continuation of debate on proposed amendments to the budget, Superintendent Clarke provided an update on funding. He noted that the Ministry has now confirmed that the province will fund all capital projects approved as of 14 May 1998, including those which were not Ministry- approved. This means that the debt on the Hopewell project and possibly the Hilson project, will be funded. The Ministry has also confirmed that the 1997 surplus of $3.2M will be available to the Board. Originally the intent was to use this money to draw down the debt. The money is no longer needed for this purpose. With respect to the availability of additional funds for special education, Superintendent Clarke advised that, if the province had planned to provide more money, this would have been announced as part of the funding model. Superintendent Clarke also pointed out that, in accordance with a recent TPP (Teacher Pension Plan) agreement, up to 300 teachers have been provided with a retirement window. Should all 300 teachers take advantage of this opportunity the result will be a $9.8M retirement gratuity spike (for sick leave) which has not been provided for in the budget. If the 1997 surplus and the monies realized from the sale of properties to fund the Hopewell and Hilson projects were redirected, there would be sufficient funds to fund the spike. The retirement gratuity for the teachers retiring under the window is not eligible for Transition Funding; therefore, the Board will have to find the money. Budget Committee 6 21 & 22 May 1998 • Superintendent Clarke also noted that the salary differential displayed in the budget which would result from teachers retiring and being replaced by beginning teachers ($4.6M for 1998 -99) was based on the assumption that 60% of the eligible 300 would retire (Section 2, folio 15). Trustee Chambers referred to a media announcement indicating that the Minister is willing to entertain concerns from boards regarding errors in grant calculations or other shortfalls. He queried whether there has been any further comment. Superintendent Clarke advised that it is unlikely that any more monies will be provided. In response to queries, Superintendent Clarke confirmed that an amount of $2.9M has been included in the budget from reserves to fund the normal amount of gratuities plus the gratuities for individuals in cancelled positions; however, gratuities for teachers who will opt for retirement under the TPP window were not included. With regard to redirecting the funding which would have been used to fund the Hopewell and Hilson projects, Superintendent Clarke noted that a decision must be made prior to publishing the 1997 audited financial statements. The statements are to be submitted to the Business Services Committee on 10 June 1998. Approximately $6M would be available to the Board if a decision were made to use the surplus and redirect the funds for Hopewell and Hilson. Superintendent Clarke also noted that the Ministry has not yet announced a decision regarding the disposition of the labour action reserve of $6M. It is speculated, however, that this money will not be available to boards and is, in fact, being used to fund the $100M for learning materials included in the provincial budget. Staff confirmed that efforts to persuade the province that the monies belong to the boards are ongoing across the province. It is unlikely that these efforts will be successful. With regard to the rationale for not including the $9.8M in the budget, staff noted that the agreement regarding the TPP was only finalized recently. Further, staff did not know how many teachers would take advantage of the window. Trustees expressed surprise that $4.6M was added to the budget in savings from teacher retirements; however, no related liability was included. It was suggested that the same percentage should be used in calculating savings and liabilities. Staff pointed out that initially it was known that there would be a 1997 surplus of $3.2M. Further the former CBE had a reserve of $3.5M. It was hoped that this could be kept for gratuities, leaving a relatively small deficit; however, the $3.5M was required as a funding source. With respect to the fact that retirement gratuities for teachers retiring under the TPP window are not eligible for Transition Funding, Superintendent Clarke clarified that the province will fund severance, but not sick leave gratuities. This has been verified with Ministry staff. Superintendent Clarke confirmed that the Board has applied for $19M of Transition Funding for various aspects related to restructuring. The budget does not include any revenue which might be received through this avenue. The province has indicated that an announcement is to be made by mid to late June. The Board is to file its budget by 15 June 1998. Staff is attempting to finalize decisions as soon as possible so that schools can be advised of their staffing and budgets before the end of the school year. The Board will also be applying for Phase 2 funding; however, it is not known whether an allocation will be received or the size of the allocation. With regard to the timeframe for TPP retirements, staff noted that 300 teachers are eligible to retire now - 140 at the elementary level and 160 at the secondary level; however, they may retire at any time over the three year window. These are all individuals who have or will soon have an 85 factor or above. Budget Committee 7 21 & 22 May 1998 ,�!q. Staff explained that, in keeping with Ministry guidelines, rather than recording sick leave as a liability as individuals become entitled to it, boards include a note on their financial statements indicating the amount. This amount is known as an "unfunded liability". Trustee Bled referred to the "Summary of the Proposed Budget by Provincial Funding Category", dated 21 May 1998. She queried the variance between the recommended budget and revenue columns in Appendix B, noting in particular the differences of $20,245,268, $31,949,905 and $7,415,577 in preparation time, classroom teachers and teacher consultants, respectively. Staff will provide a written response. In response to a query as to why the Board is spending $3,426,932 less than the revenue for School Operations (Facilities), staff noted that when the budget was formulated it was thought that capital debt would have to be funded. Rather than take the money out of the classroom, it was considered that it should be taken out of this area. The Board could choose to put an amount back into School Operations (Facilities). Trustee Morse moved THAT the Committee convene in camera to discuss staffing issues. The motion carried. The Committee reconvened in public session at 11.00 p.m. 6. Continuation of Debate on Amendments to the 1998 -99 Budget (Note: all references are to the memorandum, dated 21 May 1998, from Trustee Lynn Graham) a) Motions that Would Transfer Reserves or Previous Year's Surplus to 1998 -99 Operating_ Budge Amendment 1A: Use of Year End Surplus Trustee Libbey moved: THAT the estimated surplus of $3,200,000 in the predecessor boards as of 31 December 1997, be used as revenue in 1998 -99 rather than be applied to debt as is proposed in the staff - recommended budget. Given that confirmation has been received that the province will pay down the debt, Trustee Libbey considered that the Board should used the 1997 surplus of $3.2M to preserve programs. At the same time, he urged staff to continue efforts to recoup money from the province for areas such as transportation and special education. Trustees opposed to the motion noted that the $3.2M might be the last possible reserve the Board could hold back and were reluctant to transfer these monies to operating funds. They noted that the situation next year will be even more difficult. Trustees supporting the motion pointed out that the chances of obtaining more money from the province will be reduced if the Board has a reserve and considered that any available money should be used now. A motion by Trustee Bled to defer this motion until all the other proposed amendments have been dealt with was defeated. The amendment was carried. csuaget Committee 8 21 & 22 May 1998 30. b) Motions that Deal with Unrealized Savings or Revenues i) Amendment No. 3.$1-3M Interest Costs Related to Late Payments Trustee Libbey moved: THAT revenue be increased to include $1,300,000, being an estimate of the interest costs related to late payments from the municipalities, because either funding will soon be forthcoming from the Ministry or municipalities will be made to pay earlier. Trustee Libbey noted that a number of boards, including the Thames Valley School Board, are pursuing this issue and other matters with the Ministry. He noted that the province has reversed its position on capital debt and expressed confidence that the question of quarterly payments by municipalities will also be addressed. In response to queries, Superintendent Clarke advised that the $1.3M is based on the Board's borrowing $25M at all times, averaged over a 12 month period. Trustee Libbey accepted as a friendly amendment a suggestion from Trustee Chambers that the following be added as part b) : THAT revenue be increased to include $1M, being an estimate of the shortfall in the transportation grant from the province. Superintendent Clarke noted that the $1M is the difference between what the Board is spending and the transportation grant. Trustees opposed to the motion maintained that the amounts in the amendment are speculative and that it would be irresponsible and illegal to build a budget on amounts which may not materialize. They did not consider it appropriate to use this approach to correct errors in the funding formula. Director Lane confirmed that the Ministry does not consider it appropriate for boards to build their budgets on potential revenue. It is possible that the Ministry would ask the Board to resubmit its budget and to cover off the amount which was based on speculation. Trustee Scott advised that the OCDSB is pursuing a number of issues in concert with the Thames Valley Board. While it has not been possible to obtain information from the Ministry on items other than the capital debt, the OCDSB has been successful in obtaining an appointment with the Minister on Wednesday, 27 May 1998. Trustee Lam queried the possibility of borrowing money from the Board's EDC account. Superintendent Clarke advised that the Act requires the Board to pay the going rate of interest which would be an expense in the operating budget. Further, EDCs are to be used for the purchase of new sites. The Board would not realize any benefit from the interest until such time as a site was purchased. A written explanation will be provided. In response to further queries, staff noted that the $13M in interest must be shown as an expense. If the amendment is passed, this amount would appear on the revenue side. With regard to the $1M differential in the transportation grant, Superintendent Clarke noted that while the province's stated intention was to provide as much money to boards for transportation as last year, the province indicated this was an overall amount. It was subsequently clarified that 3% would be deducted off the top. Budget Committee 9 21 & 22 May 1998 �1 The amendment was voted on in parts and was defeated. ii) Amendment No. 4 Savings Realized from JK Delivery Model Trustee Libbey moved: THAT the staff estimate of the costs of JK be reduced by $1M, being the savings that will be realized once the Ministry agrees with an appropriate model involving ECEs. In response to queries, staff advised that while the Ministry has not yet responded formally, indications are that the Minister is looking favourably at the Board's request to use ECEs in up to half the JK classes across the jurisdiction. An estimated $1M in savings would be generated if 25% of the JK classes were staffed with ECEs. Trustee Chambers noted that the use of ECEs is still at the pilot stage and expansion should be carefully explored. He favoured an amendment which would be less prescriptive with regard to identifying the amount of savings but would direct any monies realized towards the provision of special education assistance for Junior and Senior Kindergarten children. He noted that more children will be identified at an early stage; the sooner intervention begins, the better. Dave Wildman, non - voting representative for OCETF, noted that a College of Teachers has been established to regulate the teaching profession. He considered it contradictory to replace certified teachers with individuals who cannot be regulated. He pointed out that the federation has launched a grievance with regard to the ECE pilot project. In response to queries, the Director advised that the Ministry is aware that the federation has launched a policy grievance. It is not certain whether the Ministry has taken this into account or who would be expected to fund the costs of the grievance. Trustee Scott noted that the issue of ECEs is among those to be discussed with the Minister at the meeting scheduled for next week. Trustees opposed to the motion maintained that the savings referenced in the motion are speculative. Trustees supporting the motion noted that the Ministry is likely to approve an expanded use of ECEs; therefore, the savings are real. Trustee Hill moved in amendment to the amendment to add the following as part b): THAT staff pursue the approval of the model using ECEs in the JK classroom and apply any savings for the enrichment of special education programs in JK and SK . Trustee Scott maintained that the sub - amendment constituted a completely new motion. The Chair ruled that the sub - amendment was in order. The Chair's ruling was challenged and, following a vote, was over - turned. Accordingly, the sub - amendment was dropped. Discussion reverted to the amendment. In response to queries, staff noted that the average pupil teacher ratio for junior -and Senior Kindergarten is currently 23:1. The current staffing formula generates an Educational Assistant. The budget as proposed eliminates educational assistant positions; therefore no EAs will be available for those classes. Dave Wildman noted the potential impact on the classroom, if ECEs are used. Trustee Libbey maintained that it is not possible to provide precise numbers and that it is appropriate to use estimates in formulating a budget. The amendment was defeated. nuaget t.ommittee 10 21 & 22 May 1998 M (W In view of the hour, Trustee Scott suggested that the meeting be adjourned to another time. By means of a straw vote, Committee members and staff expressed a preference for continuing the meeting on Friday, 22 May 1998. Trustee Scott moved: THAT the meeting be adjourned until Friday, 22 May 1998 at 7.00 p.m. in the Board Room. The motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 12.40 a.m., Friday, 22 May 1998. The Committee reconvened on Friday, 22 May 1998 at 7.10 p.m. in the Board Room, 133 Greenbank Road, 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 & Secretary of the Board Michael Clarke, Superintendent of Business and Treasurer of the Board Barbara Stollery, Superintendent of Program and Information Technology Judy Turriff, Superintendent of Special Education and Student Services Jim Vair, Superintendent of Human Resources Judith Hoye, Superintendent of School Services Marie - Louise Chartrand, Comptroller of Finance Donna Warren- Maxwell, Manager of Physical Planning & Transportation Laura McAlister, Principal, Special Education Terry Laughlin, Chief, Psychological Services Dan Wiseman, Chief of Social Work Anna Bowles, Principal of Special Education 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: Stan Currie, Ottawa - Carleton Assembly of School Councils Janet Fader, Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (Teachers) 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 Nancy Myers, Special Education Advisory Committee, alternate Chair's Remarks Trustee Graham expressed thanks to the Director, Superintendent Clarke, Marie- Louise Chartrand and senior staff for their work on the budget. She also expressed appreciation to Joan Melancon, Assistant Secretary of the Board, and Estelle Gunner, Committee Coordinator, for providing Budget Committee 11 21 & 22 May 1998 !33. support for the Committee. She noted the contribution of all Committee members and thanked them for their input. 2. Update re Severance /Retirement Gratuities Using overheads, Superintendent Clarke clarified the information provided the previous evening regarding severance and retirement gratuities and the potential for conversion to provincially funded debt. He explained that the staff - recommended budget includes $7.9M for gratuities and $7.4M for severance, a total of $153M. The $7.9M includes $2.6 for the normal amount of gratuity, but does not take into account the retirement gratuity for teachers who take advantage of the TPP window. If the 300 eligible teachers choose to retire, an amount of approximately $9.2M will be required, based on the average salary, leaving a shortfall of $6.6M ($9.2M- $2.6M). Depending on the number of teachers who retire, amounts will vary. The Board can potentially convert an amount of $6.6M to provincial debt. This total includes $3.7M for the Hopewell project and $2.9M for the Hilson project. The $6.6M could then be used to fund the gratuity spike; however, the level of risk must be assessed. The Ministry has indicated that capital debt on the balance sheet as of 31 December 1997 will be paid. As the Board's financial statements have not yet been issued, the Board has an opportunity to include the amount for these projects as debt. There is a significant difference, however, between the Hopewell and Hilson projects. While the debt for the Hopewell project was approved by the EIC, the debt for the Hilson project was not. Further, the Hilson project was to be funded through the sale of three properties, one administration building and two school sites. Under the new regulations if all of the money realized is not used for Hilson, the proceeds from the sale of the school sites must go into a reserve for new pupil places. If Hilson is recognized as a project for debt, the new regulations will vi apply. Therefore, while there is a window of opportunity, the risk factors, which differ between the two projects, must be taken into account. The Director added that the OBE received notification in writing that the Hilson project was to be paid for out of the current operating budget. While the view was expressed that the Ministry would be unlikely to challenge the Board, should it include the Hilson project debt, the majority of trustees suggested that the availability of funds to cover the Hilson debt could be in question. Trustee Morse noted that she had previously given notice that she would move at the Board meeting of 25 May 1998 that $6.6M of debt for the Hopewell and Hilson projects be placed in a working capital reserve fund. In light of the clarification provided this evening, she intended to strike the component related to the Hilson project from the motion. Trustee Graham noted that since this evening's meeting is a continuation, the agenda as approved on 21 May 1998, will be followed. 3. Continuation of Debate on Amendments to the 1998 -99 Budget (Note: all references are to the memorandum, dated 22 May 1998, from Trustee Lynn Graham.) a) Motions that would result in additional savings Amendment lA Trustee Norm MacDonald moved as follows: THAT the professional librarians identified as redundant in the staff - recommended budget be offered any teacher - librarian vacancy arising from retirements /departures. Budget Committee 12 21 & 22 May 1998 Trustee Norm MacDonald maintained that there is very little difference between the services provided by teacher - librarians and professional librarians and the proposal will result in savings. In response to queries, staff provided information on salary ranges, noting that professional librarians begin at approximately $38,000* rising to about $57,500* while teacher - librarians receive the standard teacher salary which amounts to $64,000 at the top of the grid. Professional librarians reach their maximum, however, in a shorter period of time. Janet Fader, non - voting representative for the Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (Teachers) expressed serious concerns with the proposed amendment. She noted that in the current collective agreement there is no provision for professional librarians in schools without teacher - librarians. She stressed that the school library is in fact a classroom and that teacher- librarians do spend the majority of their time in teaching and are required to know the curriculum. She submitted that without the teacher - librarian the library would not be a learning centre. In reply to further questions, Superintendent Stollery confirmed that teacher- librarians spend the majority of their day in teaching, either in small groups or in one-on -one situations. Currently there are 10 professional librarians in former OBE secondary schools, working in partnership with teacher - librarians. The Director noted that the teacher - librarian plays a lead role in terms of instruction. The professional librarian assists and also provides the more traditional types of library service. Former CBE secondary schools currently have teacher - librarians and library technicians. Senior staff do not consider any students to be advantaged or disadvantaged by not having a professional librarian in place. Under the proposed model, secondary schools will have teacher - librarians who will provide curriculum leadership, thereby partially offsetting the impact of eliminating department head positions and the downsizing of curriculum services. There is also the possibility of using all or part of the technician allocation to fund a library technician. Trustees opposed to the motion were concerned about collective agreement implications and considered that the potential savings do not warrant a reduction in the pedagogical value derived from having teacher - librarians in place. It was noted that this Board has not vet debated the issue of how best to manage school libraries, including how library technicians might be used. Until that discussion takes place, any change would be premature. The amendment was defeated. b) Motions that would add new costs or spending to the staff - recommended budget i) Special Education: Amendment IA: Reinstatement of Student Services and Professional Services Positions Trustee Graham invited questions of clarification on Amendments IA through 1E. In response to queries, staff confirmed that the reference to 18.74 F.T.E. positions for SERUs, SERTs and Teacher Diagnosticians in amendment lA is correct. The staff- proposed budget recommended a reduction of 18.99 F.T.E. (Budget Binder, Section 7, folio 4, Secondary Instruction) and the addition of .25 F.T.E. (folio 2, Elementary Instruction), for a net reduction of 18.74 F.T.E. Staff also confirmed that the 44 SETAs and Educational Assistants would reinstate all the SETA and EA positions related to the delivery of special education, exclusive of JK. The $4.6M includes an amount equivalent to ten additional SETA and EA positions which would be retained centrally so that positions or parts of positions can be assigned as needed. Budget Committee 13 21 & 22 Ivfay 1998 Following the completion of budget deliberations, it was discovered that staff had inadvertently provided incorrect figures. Professional librarians begin at $37,600 rising to $44,000. 36, Trustee Chambers queried the implications of the Board's decision not to extend the elementary congregated gifted program, specifically whether there is sufficient SERU time in the budget to provide a minimum of a half day per week withdrawal. Director Lane noted that the amount built into the budget for SERUs would allow staff to meet the needs of all students not in congregated classes. Superintendent Turriff pointed out that the model adopted by the former CBE did not rely exclusively on SERUs for delivery of the gifted program. In some cases, students were clustered by subject or by theme and instruction was delivered by the classroom teacher. Trustee Chambers expressed concern about the adequacy of resources to provide services to all exceptional students, including gifted children who will now be in regular classes. He expressed the view that in developing the Comprehensive Plan, an attempt should be made to quantify the level so appropriate judgements can be made. Trustee Morse noted that no assurances can be given that all eligible students would have opted for the congregated program. With regard to the number of SERUs /SERTs and teacher diagnosticians, staff confirmed that a change in the delivery model was envisaged at the secondary level. In accordance with the staff - recommended budget, the SERTs in former OBE schools will return to the instructional line and expectations for these positions will be different. At the elementary level, the total number of SERUs will be approximately the same; however these individuals will be dispersed across the system. In response to a concern regarding the loss of the coordinator of system -wide classes, Superintendent Turriff confirmed that the coordination of IPRCs and system classes will be school- based; however four central SERT positions will be held back to provide central support. Further an inter- disciplinary approach is taken when decisions regarding the direction of identified students to appropriate classes or programs are made. - The Director confirmed that if Amendment 1A were approved, staff could implement the intent and the specifics. In response to queries, Director Lane noted that there is no link between ESL and special education. While some ESD students may access special education services, ESL and ESD are funded under the Languages Grant. If ESL /ESD programming was reinstated to the former CBE level across the jurisdiction, the additional cost would be $1.8M (Amendment 3A refers). Superintendent Stollery noted that currently there is a staffing allocation for ESL in the former OBE of 29 F.T.E. teachers for 5,104 students; in the CBE there are 53 F.T.E. teachers for 1,564 students. Senior staff's intention was to harmonize ESL delivery across the system. Senior staff increased the amount of $6.9 provided under the ESL /ESD grant to $7.5M and a formula was then developed for allocation of the funds across the system. The Director noted that if Amendment 1A is approved, Amendment 1C would be subsumed along with part of Amendment 1D. The section of 1D which relates to management and the delivery model could be pursued or be discussed in the context of the Special Education Comprehensive Plan. In reply to questions regarding amendment 1B (Summer Learning Program), staff advised that funding to reinstate this program amounts to $436,000, including $96,000 for the public board's share of transportation costs. To date, the separate board has paid its share of transportation costs; indications are that this approach would continue. There are 330 students registered for this summer's program; however, there is no funding for the 1999 summer program in the staff - recommended budget. With respect to Amendment 1C (number of special education classes), the Director noted that the issue of opportunity classes and their designation will be reviewed in the context of the Special Education Comprehensive Plan. Research indicates that when students who would have been put in such classes are integrated their learning is maximized. Staff also noted that junior vocational classes are offered at McArthur and Laurentian. Staff have not yet identified the 14 special education classes , which would be eliminated under the staff - recommended budget. Duaget t_ommittee 14 21 & 22 May 1998 With regard to the degree to which harmonization would occur if $4.6M were added to the (W budget for special education, Superintendent Turriff noted that there has not been sufficient time to examine the delivery model in detail. Once the budget is finalized, staff will begin reviewing the situation. Trustee Hill moved: THAT the Board reinstate all student services and professional services positions, viz: psychological services (7.8 FTE), social workers (5.5 FTE), speech /language services (6.5 FTE), Special Education Teachers (14 FTE), SETAs, Educational Assistants (44 FTE), SERUs /SERTs/ Teacher Diagnosticians (18.74 FTE), a total of 96.5 positions and $4.6M. Trustee Hill considered it crucial to maintain services and staff. She pointed to the lack of services elsewhere, the cost of obtaining assistance privately and the waiting lists. She noted that teachers require support and the SERU allocation will be insufficient to meet the needs. Expectations of the remaining staff are also unrealistic. She pointed to the benefit which special needs students will derive if positions and dollars are reinstated in the budget. In response to a query as to whether a general motion which did not specify the actual numbers of staff would allow the Board to move towards greater harmonization, Director Lane noted that a harmonized approach requires detailed and careful study. There is not enough time to carry out such an analysis in time to make major changes for September 1998. The staffing numbers in Amendment 1A would retain the current complement. Jane Berman highlighted the need to maintain the status quo, pending a complete review of programs and services. She noted that in may areas such as psychological, speech /language and social (W work services, the recommended levels of service are considerably higher than what is currently offered and the Board has waiting lists. She urged that the Board continue its efforts to obtain additional funding from the province. Trustee Chambers moved in amendment to the amendment to add the following as Part b): THAT any savings resulting from the use of ECEs in JK be applied to the incremental provision of special education and other early learning supports for students in JK and SK. Trustee Chambers maintained that the Board should direct any additional resources which become available towards the provision of special education in the early years to meet the needs of students who will be identified earlier. A number of trustees noted that current service levels for special education will not be sustainable beyond this year and expressed concern that committing additional resources will make the budget exercise even more difficult next year. Trustees also considered the sub - amendment to be too restrictive. In response to a comment that the delivery of the JK program was to have been resolved during budget deliberations, the Director reiterated that the Ministry has not yet provided a formal response on the Board's ability to extend the pilot project involving the use of ECEs. The sub - amendment was defeated. Discussion reverted to the amendment. In response to queries, the Director confirmed that if the amendment were approved, current programs and staffing would be maintained. Any adjustments, other than minor changes, would have to be brought to trustees for approval. In response to queries about the potential for harmonization and the Budget Committee 15 21 & 22 May 1998 �7 timelines for finalization of the new Special Education Comprehensive Plan, Superintendent Turriff noted that, while the review of programs and services has already been initiated, it will not be finalized by the fall. Further, the process for developing the comprehensive plan will take some time as it involves consultation with SEAC and other stakeholders. Trustees opposed to the amendment considered the stipulation of actual staffing numbers and positions to be overly restrictive. They considered that staff should have the flexibility to make changes. Trustees supporting the amendment submitted that, at the very least, the status quo should be maintained, pending a complete review of programs and services. They considered the provision of special education services at an early stage to be a wise investment and stressed that efforts to obtain additional funding from the province for special education should continue. Trustee Getty noted that a total of $6.1M is available to trustees as a result of earlier amendments to the staff - recommended budget. Should amendments IA and 1B be adopted, only $1.1M will remain for other areas. He stressed the need for balance to meet the needs of all students in the system and pointed to the loss of 600 positions, including 300 custodians. Trustee Getty moved in amendment to the amendment: THAT the Board reinstate student services and professional services positions, viz: psychological services, social workers, speech /language services, Special Education Teachers, SETAs, Educational Assistants, and SERUs /SERTs /Teacher Diagnosticians, up to an amount of $3M. Trustees supporting the sub - amendment considered it to be a good compromise. They noted that additional monies would be provided for special education while funds would be left to address other important areas. Trustees opposed to the sub - amendment considered that the status quo should be maintained, pending a complete analysis. They noted the potential for realizing savings next year through the closure of schools. The sub - amendment was defeated. The amendment carried. ii) Special Education Amendment 1B: Summer Learning Program Trustee Hill moved: THAT the funding, including transportation, in the amount of $436,000 be provided for the Summer Learning Program for pupils with developmental disabilities and autism and that the co-terminous Board be approached to assist with the funding for transportation. (The wording incorporates friendly amendments to include references to the costs and to transportation.) Trustee Hill stressed that the Summer Learning Program is essential to maintain the level of learning of pupils with developmental disabilities and autism. Budget Committee 16 21 & 22 May 1998 • In response to queries, it was clarified that the separate board has always paid its share of the transportation costs. The OCCSB could be approached to assist with auxiliary costs, e.g. field trips. The boards have operated as a partnership with regard to this program for some time. No problems are anticipated. As transportation has been consolidated, no savings in transportation were realized as a result of amalgamation. This Board's share of transportation costs amounts to $95,000. Staff confirmed that the program would be in jeopardy if transportation were not provided. With regard to a comment that former CBE parents made a commitment to pursue alternative arrangements for transportation, Trustee Scott noted that parents did spend considerable time pursuing alternatives but were unsuccessful. In response to queries, the Director noted that research indicates that learning outcomes for these students are much higher when they are involved in learning opportunities for a continuous period of time. These students regress when these opportunities are not available. Staff also explained that traditionally this program has been funded under continuing education. Senior staff did not include this program in the budget as the province did not provide funding. To date, the Ministry has not responded to the Board's letter regarding funding for this program or to follow -up phone calls. Trustees opposed to the amendment considered that the province will provide funding for 1999. Trustees supporting the amendment cited the importance of the program and the need to make a decision now -as the memorandum of agreement which is to be signed shortly covers this period. The amendment was carried. Amendment 1C (reinstatement of 14 special education classes) and Amendment 1E (reinstatement of staffing) were subsumed by Amendment 1A. Trustee Libbey withdrew Amendment 1D (management and delivery model). The Committee took a short recess. Superintendent Clarke noted that an amount of $1,060,585 is available. iii) . Secondary Alternate Programs Trustee Graham invited questions and comments on Amendments 2A through 2C. In response to queries, Trustee Libbey confirmed that Amendment 2A refers to secondary sites only. With regard to costs, Superintendent Stollery noted that the cost for Frederick Banting amounts to $75,000 per annum, including heat, light and care staff. Staff confirmed that the amount of $206,000 covers costs for maintaining the Norman Johnston and Elizabeth Wyn Wood sites at their current locations but does not include leasing costs for the Albert Street Alternate Program (ASAP), or for the relocation of the elementary alternate programs, First Place (currently at Albert Street) and McCann (Ottawa Boys and Girls Club). ASAP and First Place will have to move as the Albert Street building is to be closed. Leasing costs could be in the range of $40,000 to $75,000 per annum per site. With regard to plans for relocating ASAP, McCann and First Place, Superintendent Stollery advised that a number of possibilities are being pursued. Further information will be provided. Superintendent Stollery also advised that the cumulative enrollment in the ASAP program to Budget Committee 17 21 & 22 May 1998 %11 1 June 1998 is 383. While ASAP differs from Elizabeth Wyn Wood and Norman Johnston in that it is a 12 week program, the overall objective is the same. Given that the ASAP program is linked to work experience, it was suggested that the business community be approached with a view to obtaining the use of space at no cost. Trustee Libbey moved: THAT the alternate secondary sites, Norman Johnston, Elizabeth Wyn Wood and ASAP that are proposed to be relocated to regular secondary schools not be so relocated, for a cost of approximately $250,000 *. ( *Note - includes an offsetting amount of $30,000 for mothballing Elizabeth Wyn Wood and Norman Johnston) Trustees supporting the motion noted the effectiveness of the secondary alternate programs and the importance of maintaining them at independent sites if their success is to be assured. They also pointed to renovation costs for relocating the Elizabeth Wyn Wood and Norman Johnston programs and the impact on the facilities at the proposed new locations. In response to queries, Superintendent Stollery indicated that no money was included in the budget for moving the elementary alternate programs from their current sites. Trustee Chambers moved in amendment to the amendment: THAT an additional $120,000 be added to the budget to deal with the relocation of the First Place and McCann programs. In reply to questions, Superintendent Stollery explained that the Board did not pay for the room and facilities for the McCann program. While staff is attempting to find an alternative location at no cost, the prospects for success are not good. In reply to a query as to why the money saved from closing the Albert Street facility was not applied to the relocation of the ASAP and First Place programs, Superintendent Clarke noted that this issue was not raised when the staff - recommended budget was developed. The entire cost of closing the facility was treated as a proposed reduction in the budget. With regard to the need for alternate programs at the elementary level, Superintendent Stollery advised that students enrolled in McCann and First Place have high needs. In many instances these students were enrolled in the McHugh program or on the waiting list for McHugh. First Place has enjoyed considerable success in re- integrating students back into the regular program. Trustees opposed to the sub - amendment considered that efforts to find a site at no cost would be successful and did not believe it necessary to add money to the budget for this purpose. Trustees supporting the sub - amendment pointed to the importance of the elementary alternate programs in meeting the needs of students. The sub - amendment carried. The amendment, as amended, also carried. It was noted that the total cost for the amendment, as amended, amounts to $370,000. Amendments 2B and 2C were subsumed. Superintendent Clarke noted that a total of $690,000 is available. Budget Committee 18 21 & 22 May 1998 ,4o, iv) English -as -a Second Language Trustee Libbey moved: THAT an amount of $690,000 be added to the budget for ESL services in 1998 -99. Trustee Libbey submitted that providing additional funds for ESL will benefit the entire system. Trustees opposed to the motion noted that this is one area where staff have developed a harmonized model. They did not consider that these efforts should be reversed. Trustees supporting the motion maintained that the level of ESL services provided by the former OBE was unacceptable. The negative impact of not serving this population adequately and the implications for the remaining population were highlighted. In response to queries, Superintendent Stollery noted that additional monies would allow staff to enhance the harmonized model which has been developed and which is based on an equitable distribution. With regard to whether senior staff have given any thought to using a portion of the Learning Opportunities Grant for ESL services, the Director noted that while this has been considered, there is a concern about building too many expectations into use of that grant. There are a number of other pressing matters, including mental health issues. With respect to funding for ESD, Superintendent Stollery noted that the number of ESD students in former CBE schools is currently being determined. Funding to provide services to these students has been identified within the ESL envelope. Trustees supporting the motion noted the importance of this area and the unlikelihood of finding funds elsewhere in the budget. Trustees opposed to the motion expressed a concern that no funds would be available for other areas requiring attention if all the remaining funds were directed towards ESL. Trustee Scott moved in amendment to the amendment: THAT the amount to be applied to ESL services be reduced to $300,000. Trustees supporting the sub - amendment concurred that some money should be left for other important areas and reiterated the need for balance. The sub - amendment was defeated. A proposal from Trustee Chambers that $438,000 be to be applied to ESL services was accepted as a friendly amendment. The amendment carried, viz: THAT an amount of $438,000 be added to the budget for ESL services in 1998 -99. In response to queries regarding the possibility of approving additions totalling more than the remaining $253,000, the Director recalled that the Board had agreed to present a balanced budget. Since no other areas have been identified for savings, additions cannot total more than the remaining Budget Committee 19 21 & 99 May 1998 ,*I. amount. Trustees can, however, give notice of further amendments to the budget for consideration at the Board meeting of 25 May 1998. V) Volunteer Coordinator Trustee Chambers withdrew Amendment 4B regarding reinstatement of the volunteer coordinator function. Trustee Libbey noted that volunteers will become increasingly important and the coordinating role is crucial. He therefore moved: THAT the position of volunteer coordinator and related costs be retained in 1998 -99, an amount of $51,060. (Note - Trustee Graham left the Chair briefly during discussion of this item in order to speak to the amendment. Trustee Getty assumed the Chair in her absence.) Trustees speaking against the motion noted that the former CBE approach worked well without such a position and with the assistance of OCLF (Ottawa - Carleton Learning Foundation). They did not consider it appropriate to expend funds in this area, when services are available from this organization. They considered that the task of screening could be carried out by the schools. Trustees speaking for the amendment pointed to the valuable role played by the coordinator in the former OBE with regard to recruitment, particularly for those schools which might not otherwise have the services of volunteers, as well as with respect to screening and training. They did not consider that these tasks should devolve to principals, given their increasing responsibilities and cited safety issues and the need to maximize volunteer resources. They expressed concern that the Ottawa Centre for Research and Innovation (OCRI), which has replaced OCLF and the Ottawa - Carleton Research Institute, would not have the ability to provide adequate services, given the number of schools across the Ottawa - Carleton area. Staff were urged to work with OCRI to develop a more coordinated model. With regard to a comment from staff that there appeared to be a higher number of volunteers in the former OBE it was noted that the number of volunteers in former CBE schools was significant; however, their use was not tracked. In response to a comment from a non - voting representative that the coordinator also ensured that the efforts of volunteers were recognized, it was pointed out that volunteers in the former CBE did receive recognition. With regard to the rationale for eliminating this position in the staff - recommended budget, Superintendent Stollery noted the need to make cuts in non - classroom areas. It was considered that principals could assume some of the responsibility and that the Board could call on OCRI, an organization which provides services for all areas boards. Trustee Getty requested further information on the role of the volunteer coordinator. The amendment was carried. Superintendent Clarke advised that an amount of $201,000 is available. vi) Outdoor Education Centres Trustee Libbey withdrew Amendment 5A. Trustee Chambers moved as follows: Budget Committee 20 21 & 22 May 1998 -�z THAT $201,000 be added to the budget for the continued operation of the Bill Mason and (W MacSkimming outdoor education centres and that efforts to move towards full-cost recovery for the operation of these centres be pursued. (Note - the amendment incorporates a friendly amendment to include a reference to moving towards full cost recovery.) Trustee Scott spoke in favour of the motion, noting that apart from the impact of the Bill Mason Centre on the curriculum for all students, the centre is an integral part of West Carleton Secondary School. The school was built around a focus on outdoor and environmental education. With regard to a concern that students from inner city'schools do not have access to the outdoor education centres, Superintendent Stollery advised that the MacSkimming facility has hosted students from every elementary school in the former OBE this year while the Bill Mason Centre has hosted students from every elementary school in the former CBE. A concern about the cost of field trips to these centres was noted. Trustees supporting the motion noted that outdoor education is an important part of the curriculum. They recognized these facilities as being centres of excellence and considered that every effort should be made to build on the initiatives of the predecessor boards. Trustee Chambers commented on the need for a review of the cross - boundary transfer issue to ensure that students have access to courses in environmental education. The amendment carried. Amendments 5C and 5D were subsumed. vii) Custodial Services Trustee Hill moved that Amendments 6A and 6B regarding the reinstatement of custodial services be referred to Board on 25 May 1998, viz: 6A THAT custodial services to schools be augmented for the 1998 -99 school year. 6B THAT custodians in the schools be reinstated. The motion to refer was carried. . C) Motions that do not add or subtract money from the budget, and Motions that deal with unrealized savings or revenues i ) Learning for Living Program Trustee Chambers moved: THAT staff be directed to consider an expanded Learning for Living Program for children at risk throughout the jurisdiction of the Board within the programs to be funded through the Learning Opportunities Grant. Trustee Chambers recalled the presentation to the Budget Committee on 21 May 1998 when the advantages of the Learning for Living Program were clearly outlined. He considered that this program should be identified for retention. Budget Committee 21 21 & 22 May 1998 Noting that the amendment does not impact the budget totals and that a discussion on this issue would be helpful, Trustee Scott moved: THAT the motion be referred to the Education Committee. Trustee Chambers confirmed that this item could be added to the agenda of the meeting of 15 June 1998. Superintendent Vair noted that delaying discussion to that point could create some problems with regard to staffing. A number of mental health workers and supervisors are impacted. The motion to refer carried. ii) Disposition of Savings from JK Delivery Model The proposed amendment regarding the disposition of savings from the JK Delivery Model was ruled to be in order as it had previously been dealt with as a sub - amendment and not as an amendment and the budget was now balanced. Trustee Chambers moved: THAT any savings resulting from the use of ECEs in Junior Kindergarten be applied to the incremental provision of special education and other early learning supports for students in JK to Grade 3. (The motion incorporates a friendly amendment to include JK to Grade 3.) The amendment carried. 4. Motion to Approve the 1998 -99 Budget Trustee Getty moved: THAT the Board approve the 1998 -99 budget, as amended in Committee, in the amount of $512,400,000 and authorize the transfer of $6.7 from reserves. Superintendent Clarke clarified that the $6.7M in reserves is comprised of the $3.2M of 1997 surplus and $3.5M of sick leave gratuity. Trustee Chambers expressed the view that the Committee has not yet arrived at a budget that meets the needs of students and he would therefore vote against the motion. Staff clarified that further amendments to the 1998 -99 budget could be made at the Board meeting of 25 May. The motion carried. Trustee Graham thanked staff, particularly Superintendent Stollery, for providing support for this evening's meeting.. Trustee Getty expressed appreciation to Trustee Graham for her efforts in chairing the Budget Committee. Budget Committee 22 21 &29 May 1998 The meeting adjourned at 1.00 a.m., Saturday, 23 May 1998. Lyrist Graham Chair Budget Committee Budget Committee 23 21 & 22 May 1998