HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 Board Governance Task Force Report 5 01 November 2011 Minutes Public
REPORT NO. 5, BOARD GOVERNANCE TASK FORCE
A meeting of the Board Governance Task Force was held on 01 November 2011 commencing at
5:50 Theresa
Kavanagh in the chair and the following also in attendance:
TRUSTEE MEMBERS: Donna Blackburn, Rob Campbell, Bronwyn Funiciello, Katie Holtzhauer and
Jennifer McKenzie
OTHER TRUSTEE: Lynn Scott
STAFF: Jennifer Adams, Director of Education and Secretary of the Board
Michèle Giroux, Executive Officer, Corporate Services
Monica Ceschia, Manager of Board Services
Sue Baker, Board/Committee Coordinator
1. Call to Order
On behalf of Chair Kavanagh, Trustee Holtzhauer called the meeting to order at 5:50 p.m.
2. Approval of Agenda
Moved by Trustee Blackburn,
THAT the agenda be approved.
- Carried -
3. Confirmation of Minutes
a. Report 4, 21 September 2011
Moved by Trustee McKenzie,
THAT Report 4 of the Board Governance Task Force, dated 21 September 2011
be confirmed.
Trustee McKenzie noted that it was her understanding that the last sentence of the third
paragraph on folio 6 regarding a staff proposal based on the input received at the meeting referred
to the timeline for a committee structure pilot project, and that this timeline was to have been
understanding that the statement regarding the timeline referred to the delivery of the Ontario
Education Services Corporation (OESC) modules. Director Adams suggested that it would be
appropriate to work first with the OESC modules before developing a plan for a committee
structure pilot project.
Trustee Kavanagh assumed the Chair.
Board Governance Task Force 01 November 2011
Report No. 5
Director Adams agreed that the minutes would be amended to clarify the distinction
between the timeline for a committee structure pilot project and the timeline for the facilitated
session for the delivery of selected OESC modules and the development of a governance policy.
Trustee McKenzie noted that she would like to receive an updated plan for a committee
structure pilot project at a future meeting.
Moved by Trustee McKenzie,
THAT Report 4 of the Board Governance Task Force, dated 21 September
2011 be confirmed, as amended.
- Carried -
4. Report 11-190, Policy on Board Governance
The Task Force had before it Report 11-190 providing for discussion a revised draft policy on
board governance.
Director Adams advised that staff has reviewed the comments made during the 21 September
2011 Board Governance Task Force meeting and a revised policy is attached as Appendix A to Report
11-190.
Executive Officer Giroux advised that the Task Force was quite specific during its discussion of
proposed changes, and staff has incorporated these changes in the revised draft policy. She also noted
b
Officer Giroux advised that a number of other related policies have been appended to the staff report for
reference in the event that the Task Force would wish to incorporate some elements of them into the
governance policy.
The Task Force commenced its review of the second draft policy on Board governance and
during discussion the following points were noted:
Title
The title is ambiguous and it is unclear as to whether governance refers to the Board of
Trustees or the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board.
§ 1.0 Objective
It is unclear whether the objective of the policy is to establish a framework to establish the
principles and philosophies, or if it should establish the principles and philosophies;
the pieces that need to be in place to enable the Board to carry out governance; and
The references to student achievement and wellbeing are mission statements and not
objective statements.
§ 2.0 Definitions
2.1 Clarify the use of Board versus board, and District versus district;
2.2 The bulleted list of activities should be moved to section 4.1 or an appended job
description and not form part of the definition of governance; and
2.4 Clarify the meaning of uphold.
- 2 -
Board Governance Task Force 01 November 2011
Report No. 5
§ 4.0 Specific Directives
§ 4.1b
Differentiate between the roles and responsibilities of trustees and those of staff; and
Clarify what constitutes a board decision and what is a staff decision.
§ 4.1c
Clarify whether the job description for board members has previously been formally
approved by the Board.
§ 4.1d
responsibilities to their constituents.
Process for Further Development of Draft Policy
Trustee Campbell expressed appreciation to staff for their work on the draft policy. He
submitted that considerable work remains to be done and a large Task Force of 8-10 members
might be too unwieldy to edit the text on a clause by clause basis. He suggested that it may
be more effective to task a smaller sub-group of the Task Force with further revisions to the
policy;
Chair Kavanagh noted that it would have been helpful if Task Force members had provided
their proposed changes in writing in advance of the meeting to enable a more thoughtful
discussion;
Director Adams suggested that the Task Force consider one of the three following methods to
continue its development of the governance policy: the Task Force reviews the draft policy
clause by clause and staff amends the draft as specifically directed (as was done at the last
meeting of the Task Force); or the Task Force reviews and proposes changes and staff
interprets the comments and suggestions and produces a third draft; or the Task Force forms a
sub-committee to do the work;
Trustee McKenzie suggested that the Task Force members outline their concerns with the
draft policy and follow up the discussion with a written email to Executive Officer Giroux.
She expressed the opinion that a small sub-committee should do the policy writing work;
Trustee Scott submitted that all trustees need to provide input and discuss the concepts
outlined in the draft policy rather than leave the work to a small group of trustees. She
Task Force should
seek input from all trustees and come to agreement about what components (i.e., statements,
beliefs, philosophies, commitments, expectations, roles and responsibilities etc.) need to be
addressed in the governance policy or other policies. She also noted that the Task Force
would need to determine which aspects belong in policy and which are more appropriately
embedded in the ylaws and Standing Rules;
Executive Officer Giroux noted that policy development is an iterative process and staff has
respected the Task Forces desire to draft
suggestions that the Task Force review governance policies of other school boards, including
the Edmonton Public School Board, she agreed to provide examples to assist the Task Force
in determining appropriate wording;
Trustee Campbell suggested that the Task Force identify the major issues that need definition,
clarity, and resolution in order to ensure that the policy provides useful guidance and that the
committee structure and reporting requirements are appropriate. He noted that it was
important to understand what we want the policy to do and whether or not the policy would
ultimately resolve some of the long-standing questions that plague this Board, such as:
i. What is the role of the Board vis a vis staff?
- 3 -
Board Governance Task Force 01 November 2011
Report No. 5
ii. What is the role of the trustees versus Board members? and
iii. What does upholding a decision of the Board mean?
Task Force members suggested that the following components may be included in the policy:
Purpose including statements about what the policy is intended to clarify and
o
resolve for the Board
Definitions
o
Specific Directives:
o
i) Beliefs including:
a. determine which beliefs belong in the policy, for example beliefs about board
governance and/or beliefs about student learning;
b. the role of the Board in setting general direction through policy and
monitoring policy implementation;
c. address what happens when the Board has not done its work fully or properly
or does not have clear policies in areas where it wants work done;
d. -
appeals, boundary adjustments, program reviews, principal appointments etc.
and determine whether policy statements are required or if these areas are
outside the jurisdiction of the Board of Trustees; and
e. address Board of Trustee involvement when the Board determines that staff
has not done its work fully or properly.
ii) Guiding principles including:
a. differentiate between guiding principles for the district and guiding principles
for Board governance.
iii) Commitments of the Board, including:
a. how the Board would conduct its business and tackle underlying issues; and
b. expectations for schools and central services.
iv) Job Description for Board Members, including:
a. specificity around the roles, responsibilities and jurisdiction for the Board
and for staff (i.e., policy setting, budget, strategic plan, implementing and
monitoring policies, implementing provincial initiatives, facilities,
monitoring OCENET, OSDN, Education Foundation, OSTA, constituency
affairs); and
b. the relationship between the Board and the Director of Education and
delegation of authority.
Executive Officer Giroux noted that while the policy can endeavour to address some systemic
enforce it. She also noted that this policy should be different from a code of conduct for
trustees;
monitoring function, for example, should the Board amend and edit reports, or are trustees
required to participate on selection committees when authority to hire has been delegated to
the Director of Education? It would be helpful for new trustees to have examples of what
they are expected to monitor and how it should be done;
Bill 177 and the job description for board members include the following monitoring
functions: monitoring the effectiveness of policies and multi-year plans in achieving the
monitoring the performance of the Director of Education; and monitoring the fiscal
management of the district;
Trustee McKenzie submitted that staff may feel responsible to both the Board of Trustees and
the Ministry of Education, and when provincial initiatives such as full-day learning and the
- 4 -
Board Governance Task Force 01 November 2011
Report No. 5
extended day program are imposed on school boards, the Board of Trustees may not become
involved until the implementation of an initiative becomes an issue. She maintained that
c-
making powers; and
With regard to local jurisdiction, clarity is required on policy governance in certain areas, for
example, if the Board is requested by staff to make decisions on the location of EFI classes,
then why does it not make decisions on the location of special education classes; and why are
under what circumstances is the Board, through trustee motion, able to provide direction to
staff in areas that are normally within the purview of staff.
5. Next Steps: Board Governance
Chair Kavanagh asked Task Force members to submit their belief statements, concerns about the
jurisdiction and other issues, and any other input on the draft policy to Executive Officer Giroux
not later than 25 November 2011. The input will be compiled by staff for discussion at the next regular
meeting of the Task Force on 19 December. Discussion will include the formulation of a statement on the
Trustee Scott suggested that the Task Force generate more than one statement on a particular
issue in order to facilitate debate at the Board level.
Chair Kavanagh reminded the members that a facilitated discussion of OESC modules for
trustees and senior staff will take place on 16 November 2011.
6. New Business
There was no new business.
7. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Theresa Kavanagh
Chair
Board Governance Task Force
- 5 -
Board Governance Task Force 01 November 2011
Report No. 5