Loading...
5/11/2010 - Special Board MeetingTHAMES VALLEY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD REGULAR BOARD MEETING,PUBLIC SESSION 2010 MAY 11,7:00 P.M. BOARD ROOM,EDUCATION CENTRE AGENDA V-verbal M -material 1. CALL TO ORDER V 2. 0 CANADA V 3. SPECIAL MUSICALPRESENTATION -Victory Memorial Public School Grade 7 Orchestra V 4.APPROVAL OF AGENDA M 5.OFFICIAL RECORD M 6.RECOGNITIONS -none V 7.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST V 8. CHAIR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V 9. DIRECTOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V 10.PUBLIC INPUT a. W.Armstrong re F.D.Roosevelt/Lord Nelson/Prince Charles/ Sir Winston Churchill Public School Accommodation Review Committee M b. W.Brock re School Accommodation Process M 11.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS a. SpecialEducationReport Update V 12.MINUTES OFTHE2010 APRIL 27 BOARD MEETING M a.Confirmation of Minutes b.Business Arising from the Minutes 13.STUDENT TRUSTEES'UPDATE V 14.2010-11 BUDGET DISCUSSION a.Early Learning Program V 15.REPORTS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES a.Special Education Advisory Committee,2010 April 12 (material to be distributed at meeting)M b. Long-term Community Partnership,2010 April 26 M c.Budget Advisory Committee,2010 April26 M d. PolicyWorking Committee, 2010 April 27 M e.Information Committee of the Whole,2010 May04 M f.Chairs'Committee,2010 May05 M g. Committee of the Whole in Camera, 2010 May 11 V 17.COMMUNICATIONS a.Ontario Public School Boards'Association -Update V b. Corporation ofthe Township of Norwich re Otterviile,North Norwich and Norwich Public Schools M c. Oxford County Council re Otterviile,North Norwich and NorwichPublic Schools M d.Ontario Student Trustees'Association OSTA-AECO M 18.NOTICE OF MOTION 19.MOTION -NOTICE OF WHiCH HAS BEEN GIVEN -none 20.ADDITIONAL ITEMS 21.QUESTIONS/COMMENTS BY MEMBERS 22.ADJOURNMENT r THAMES VALLEY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD REGULAR MEETING,PUBLIC SESSION 2010 MAY 11 The Board met in regular session on 2010 May 11 In the Board Room at the Education Centre, meeting In public session at 7:10 p.m. to 10:05 p.m.The following were in attendance: TRUSTEES J.Bennett 8.Doub F.Exiey T.Grant G.Hart W.Huff P.Jaffe P.Battler J.Kamphuis S.Peters S.Polhlll T.Roberts J.Stewart R.Tisdale Regrets:0.Neville ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS K.Dalton M.Sereda L.Elliott M.E.Smith B.Greene B.Sonier C.Bourbonnais-MacDonald B.Tucker K.Edgar P. Tufts 8.Hughes K. Bushell M.Moynihan S. Christie V.Neilsen B.Hester R.Hoffman K.Meeson 0.Rajala K.Young 8.Young J.Marlborough 1.CALL TO ORDER. Board Chair T.Roberts called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. 2./3.0 CANADA AND MUSICAL PRESENTATION The appreciation of the Board was extended to the VictoryMemorial Public School Grade 7 Orchestra and Conductor L.McCarthy for leading in the singing of 0'Canada and performing three musical selections.Principal K.Waud was also in attendance. 4.APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved on motion of J.Stewart,seconded by F.Exley. 5.OFFICIAL RECORD 8.Christie,Supervisor,Corporate Services,read the following official record into the minutes: We regret to record the death ofJane Nuckowski, an Elementary Administrative Secretary at Southdale Public School,Strathroy,on 2010 May 04 and Bryten Brown, a student at Locke's Public School,St.Thomas on Saturday,May 8,2010. 6.RECOGNITIONS -none 7.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST -No conflicts of interest were declared. 2010 May 11 •••2 8.CHAIR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Chair Roberts presented a video produced by Board employees entitled "Homophopia is Gay"and commended Learning Supervisors S. Dale, T. Wilson and Sir Frederick Banting Secondary School Vice Principal G. Jolink on the quality of the presentation.Trustee Sattler noted appreciation to the Chair for sharing video. Chair Roberts thanked the trustees who attended the Home and School Annual Banquet Meeting and the Wilberforce and West Nissouri Public School openings and reminded them of the opening of the Blenheim District Public School on 2010 May 13. Appreciation was extended to Exec.Supt.M.Sereda,Learning Supervisor K. Button and Staff Development Liaison L. Lewis for the leadership workshop of 2010 May 07. Trustees were reminded ofthe Equityand Inclusive workshops being held at the Helenic Centre on 2010 May 13 at 12;00 p.m.and 5:00 p.m.and at the Education Centre on 2010 May 15 at 8:30 a.m.; the Safe Schools Award night on 2010 May 19;and the Special Olympics at the PriceWaterhouse Stadium and the University of Western Ontario on 2010 May25, 26 and 27! 9.DIRECTOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Director Tucker noted that the Board received a certificate of appreciation from the Canadian Red Cross commending the quick response of Board staff in raising donations for the victims of the Haiti earthquake disaster. He invited Executive Officer K.Bushell to update the Board on an Enrolment Pressure Grant received for Oxbow Public School.Mr.Bushell advised the trustees that a grant has been received for 119 pupil places which equates to approximately $2 million for capital construction.A report is expected to be brought forward to the Board in the fall of 2010 with construction anticipated to begin in the spring of 2011 and completion by 2011 September. In response to a question,Supt.M.Moynihan updated the Board on the status ofthe waiting lists at Jeanne Sauv6 French Immersion Public School.It was noted that currently there are 11 students on a waiting listfor Grade 1 and six for Grade 7 extended French.Supt.Moynihan advised that itis felt that all current students enrolled as well as the students on a waiting list may be accommodated at -Jeanne Sauv§Fl P.S.if the Board approves five classes of Grade 1 with 20 students;one Grade 7 extended French class witha cap of34 students and one Grade 8 extended French class witha cap of 35 students.Any new registrations would be offered a choice of an out-of-area French Immersion school noting the families would be responsible for travel arrangements.Communication will be provided to parents and students through the school. Chair Roberts commended the Administration on solving this issue for the benefit of the students and parents. DirectorTucker noted the above motions supercede the motions of 2010 February and explained that the Ministry does not have a class size cap mandated for senior elementary;however,the guideline is 28 students,plus or minus four. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1.That an enrolment cap be instituted at Jeanne Sauv6 French Immersion Public School at the Grade 1 level such that no more than five Grade 1 classes will be created and ail five classes meet the provincial Primary Class Size cap regulations. The recommendation was approved on motion by J.Stewart,seconded by J.Bennett. 2010 May 11...3 9.DIRECTOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS -cont'd RECOMMENDATIONS -cont'd 2.That an enrolment cap be Instituted at Jeanne Sauv6 French Immersion Public School such that only one Grade 7 Extended French Program class with a cap of 34 students be offered. The recommendation was approved on motion byJ. Bennett,seconded by P. Jaffe. 3.That an enrolment cap be instituted at Jeanne Sauv§French Immersion Public School such that only one Grade 8 Extended French Program class with a cap of 35 students be offered. The recommendation was approved on motion by J.Stewart,seconded by S.Polhill. 10.PUBLIC INPUT a. W.Armstrong re F.D.Roosevelt/Lord Nelson/Prince Charles/Sir Winston Churchill Public School Accommodation Review Committee (ARC) W.Armstrong,representing a group of citizens from FD Roosevelt,Lord Nelson,Prince Charles and Sir Winston Churchill Public Schools described concerns over the possible closure of Sir Winston Churchill Public School.Members of the Churchill Parent Council were in the audience. Mr.Armstrong noted concerns that the future enrolment needs of area students will not be met if the school is closed. Trustee Jaffe invited Mr.Armstrong to attend the future Accommodation Review Committee meetings for the area. In response to a question,Director Tucker noted that Administration was aware of the study report referenced by Mr.Armstrong, and, infact,contributed data for the report. Exec. Supt.K. Dalton explained that the City of London approved the Terms of Reference in 2009 June. Planning OfficerG.Owens met withthe consultant writingthe report shortly thereafter to discuss the process should the land be redeveloped and if the multiple land owners should decide to sell their land and share pupilyield numbers.In recent years,Mr.Owens has been apprised of 14 to 16 different conceptual plans such as this one for the City of London noting that each plan develops at Its own rate depending on many factors. The next stage of development would be the Specific Plans of Subdivision which has not yet been reached inthis accommodation study process.The Specific Plans of Subdivision indicates the type of housing and streets in the subdivision. At that time, more specific data can be determined based on the Plans and future student accommodation Is reviewed. Exec. Supt. Dalton explained that when there Is a new subdivision in place, a request will be brought forward to the Board to approve a holding zone for students inthe area.She cited the Somerset area as an example.Ifthe subdivision becomes too large to accommodate the children inthat zone,a report will be brought back to the Board for an alternate accommodation plan which may happen intwo, fiveor ten years.If the student population becomes so large that the Board is Ina position to apply to the Ministry to build a new school, for example,the new Stoneycreek PublicSchool, the Board is requested to approve the applicationat that time.The Board receives information on planning when It comes to fruition.As pupils migrate, shift, move and attendance patterns change,Planning Officer Owens prepares new plans through capital planning. It was noted that the four schools listed in this accommodation review,combined with Lome Avenue Public School,would consist of over 1000 empty pupil places. 2010 May 11...4 10.PUBLIC INPUT-cont'd b.W.Brock re School Accommodation Process W. Brock expressed his appreciation to the Board for the administrative process in the accommodation review studies.He urged the Board to continue and noted his belief that Lome Avenue Public School should not be Included In the current accommodation study. Exec.Supt.Dalton explained that the Board has not proceeded with changes to Lome Avenue Public School as It is not deemed a top priority at this time but may be studied In the future depending on the priorities. Trustee Jaffe thanked Mr. Brock for his passion for public education and his presentation. 11.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS a.Special Education Report Update Supt.K.Edgar updated the Board on the Special Education Report Update (formally called Special Education Plan).She advised that the Deputy Minister of Education,recently sent out a memorandum entitled,"Instructions Regarding School Boards'/School Authorities -Plans for the Provision of Special Education Programs and Services,2010"which outlined changes to the Special Education Plan previously developed by school boards and sent to the Ministry on an annual basis. Supt.Edgar advised that this Is a transition year In an evolving process as the Ministry works to bring Special Education planning Into alignment with the Board Improvement planning process focused on Improving student achievement.Thames Valley has been working diligently over the past year to ensure that the special education needs of students are Included in the Board's Improvement planning process withtwo members of the Special Education team represented on the Board Improvement Planning Team.A recent memo from the Student Achievement Division was sent to Directors of Education encouraging boards to consider the needs of special education students In the development of board improvement plans. The following are elements/changes to the Special Education Report process: • As of 2010,boards of education will no longer be required to submit a special education plan to the Ministryof Education.Instead,boards are required to ensure that a report is made available to the community regarding the special education programs and services available to meet the needs of the students Inthe board. This will be posted on the board website by the beginning of the 2010-2011 school year; • A copy ofa completed checklist of the required elements of a special education report, to be signed by the Director of Education,must be sent to the Regional Office of the Ministryof Education by 2010 September 1; Inthe preparation of the report,boards will continue to consult withtheir respective Special Education Advisory Committees.To that end,a sub-committee ofSEAC will be meeting with Supt.Edgar next week to work on the development of and amendments to the Board's Special Education Report; 2010 May 11...5 11.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS -cont'd a.Special Education Report Update -cont'd •The elements of the Special Education Report are brol<endown into the4 foiiowing three sub- categories; Speciai Education Programs and Services • Model for Special Education •(PRC Process •Special Education Placements Provided by the Board •lEPs •Special Education Staff •Specialized Equipment •Transportation •Transition Planning Provincial Information •Roles and Responsibilities •Categories and Definitions of Exceptionalities •Provincial and Demonstration Schools In Ontario Other Related Information Required for Community •Early Identification Procedures and Intervention Strategies •Educational and Other Assessments •Coordination of Services with Other Ministries or Agencies •Specialized Health Support Services in School Settings •Staff Development •Accessibility (AODA) •Parent Guide to Special Education •The Special Education Advisory Committee Supt.Edgar noted the value of the trustees'support for the Special Education Programs and Services Department over the years in its quest to address the needs of the Board's student population and, as such,will continue to bring the Special Education Report to the Board for approval. Responding to a question,Supt.Edgar noted that this is a transition period and although there may be changes to information and format,the process will not have to be recreated.She explained that Board approval is not required; however, the intention is to continue to bringthe information forward to the trustees.It was noted that the Board Improvement Plan is brought to the Board for Information not approval. Director Tucker explained that the Administration does not intend to minimizethe Importance ofthe role of the Special Education Advisory Committee. 12.MINUTES OF THE 2010 APRIL 27 BOARD MEETING a.Confirmation of Minutes The minutes of the Regular Board Meeting of 2010 April 27 were adopted on motion of F.Exley, seconded by G. Hart. b.Business Arising from Minutes -none 13.STUDENT TRUSTEES'UPDATE StudentTrustee J.Kamphuis informed the Board that the newStudentTrustees have been selected and will be introduced to the Student Advisory Council on 2010 May26 and will be invited to attend a Board meeting in 2010 June. 2010 May 11...6 14.2010-11 BUDGET DISCUSSION a. Early Learning Program (ELP) Supt. C. Bourbonnais-MacDonald updated the Board on the Early Learning Program (ELP) implementation.She advised that three modelswere beingpresented for review:Before,Core Day and AfterProgram; Core Dayand AfterProgram; and Core Day Only.The Province has indicatedthat itwill besupplyingmodels and timetables honouringcontractual obligationsand Bill 242 expectations. Special education needs students may be able to receive support for the full-day learning. The Ministry of Healthand Long-TermCare, the Ministry ofYouthand Children Services and the Ministry of Education are workingclosely to support special needs children so they may participate inthe ELP. Whileat this point no policy changes are foreseen,there will be an evaluation of ELPinYears one and two. Meetingscontinue totake place with municipal representatives to discuss subsidies and to maintain communication and thefinancial process.Municipalitieswill provide a portionofthe parent fee based on provincial criteria with parents being responsible forthe balance.Supervisor of FinancialSupport Services B.Hester noted the Ministry's proposed timetable will be received in the next couple of weeks. Exec. Supt. B.Greene explained that with any changes to the model,revenues and expenditures will be revised. Early Learning Program Co-ordinator H.Gerrits advised that,as a result of returned surveys.It has been determined that seven of the ELP sites will require the Before and After Program.Four of these are in London,one in St.Thomas,one in Lucan and one in Mount Byrdges.The Ministry has acknowledged that itmay not be viable for boards to provide the extended day program Inall ELP sites. In response to a question,Ms.Gerrits explained that any ELP spaces available at an extended day school may onlybe filled withJK/SK students.All seven sites have existing community partners and they have been made aware that JK/SK students will become part of the Boards'ELP. Six to 12- year-old students will still fall under the responsibility of the community partners'before-and-after programs.The Bill 242 amendments indicate that each board is able to enter into third party agreements for non-instructional days. Director Tucker explained that the Province is continuing to rollout Information regarding the ELP. The Board will be proposing a program that is best for the students.Supt.Bourbonnais-MacDonald noted that the nap component Is not part of the draft program;however,quiet time will be provided for those students who require It.She described the before-and-after programs as being directly related to the school day activities to provide caring and sound learning. Director Tucker described a proposed Co-ordinator/Supervisor position to oversee the ELP.This centralized position would work with Capital Planning,Operations,Finance and Human Resource Services,oversee supervision of the ELP and co-ordinate assignments.Ideally,this position would commence immediately if funds are available within the current budget and report to a Superintendent.Director Tucker explained that In five years.It is expected that there will be approximately 500 ECE employees to supervise.Other boards are considering similar positions. Trustee Bennett noted concerns about hiring a new position without funding from the Ministry as the ELP is a Ministry initiative. Exec.Supt.Sereda explained that with multiple memos and directives being received from the Ministry and a number of issues coming forth almost on a daily basis,the program is becoming unmanageable and a point person would be extremely beneficial.This scenario is similar to the custodial staff where as they report to the principal at their school but there is one centralized person to oversee the scheduling,supervision and administration of the custodial staff. 2010 May 11...7 14.2010-11 BUDGET DISCUSSION -cont'd a.Early Learning Program (ELP)-cont'd The Deputy Ministry was presented with plans that included information regarding the larger boards' requirement of additional administrative staff to oversee the ELP.The Ministryis reviewing revenues but no feedback has been received by the Board at this time regarding an additional administrative position. Supt.Bourbonnais-MacDonald described the Before,Core Day &After Program as a seamless day for four and five-year-old students.The proposed budget was based on this model.She noted that there must be provisions for lunch period and breaks for students and teachers,and prep time for teachers.Byhaving two ECE's overlap,the lunch room supervisor requirement may be eliminated. In some schools,the Core Day Only model is being considered but there are implications regarding what happens at lunch time,break time and prep time.Many perimeters must be considered. Trustee Jaffe raised concern that the Ministryis implementing the program so quickly.The Director noted that,from the Ministry's perspective,this is a small roll out of a five-year plan and for the smaller boards,the ELP is not as complicated.He advised that the Before and After Program will be self-sustaining and no deficit will be incurred by the Board. Chair Roberts asked the trustees to consider the additional administrative position for the budget process.Exec.Supt.Greene reminded the trustees that this position was highlighted as a system priority at the Draft Budget presentation on 2010 May04.Director Tucker advised that the salary and position details will be discussed with Human Resources and a report will be brought forward to the Board,possibly at the meeting of 2010 May 25. Trustee Tisdale raised concern over ensuring the appropriate number of staff are hired if the Board does not know which program model to use.Director Tucker explained that the Ministry has been advised that the Board needs to knowwhich model will be approved in order that staffing may begin. 15.REPORTS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION -none 2010 May 11...8 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES а.REPORT OF THE SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COWIMITTEE 2010 April 12 6:35 p.m.-8:26 p.m. l\/lembers Administration and Ottiers IVl.Barbeau,VOiCE for Hearing-Impaired Children K.Edgar,Superintendent of J.Bennett,Trustee Education,Special Education S.Casseii,The Learning Disabilities Assoc.Of Ontario J.Johnston,Learning Supervisor, London Region Special Education D. Ensing,Assoc.for BrightChildren L.Carswell,Elementary Principal S.FIddes,Alternate,Autism Ontario London R.Culhane,Elementary Principal S. Fox,Children's Aid Society of London and Middlesex T.Grant,Trustee J. Gritzan,Thames Valley Children's Centre (Chair) A.Loebus,London Down Syndrome Association (-8:10) A. Morse,Easter Seal Society D.Smith,Thames Valley Council of Home and School Associations R.TIsdale,Trustee W.Waters (Rodic), Alternate, Vanier Children's Services S. Wilson,Community Living Education Committee J. Wright, Autism Ontario London Guests:Ms. Helm, parent, B.Tucker, Director of Education Regrets:, T.Fawdry,The Learning Disabilities Assoc. ofOntario-London Region,B.Montminy, Vanier Children's Services,V.Towell,Secondary Vice Principal, J. Van Bommel,Secondary Principal Absent: B. Harvey, Epilepsy Support Centre,A.Morell,TVPIC 1.CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. Inthe London Room at the Education Centre. 2.CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA The reviewof"School Health Support Services"added to the agenda as item 8b. The agenda was confirmed as amended. 3.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST -There were no conflicts of interest declared. 4.REPORT OF THE MEETING FROM 2010 March 2.2010 The report of the meeting of 2010 March 2,was approved as printed. 5.BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE REPORT OF 2010 March 2,2010 Exec. Supt.L.Elliot presented information on review of vocational programs including both organizations and programming options at the SEAC meeting 02 February 2010.SEAC members had small group discussion at the 02 March 2010 SEAC meeting and presented information back to Exec.Supt.L.Elliot.Input will be collected and compiled by May. TVACE and TVSSAC have submitted Information. б.SPECIAL EDUCATION BUDGET UPDATE •Supt.K.Edgar presented the written response to the questions posed In the preamble of the Special Education Budget submission to SEAC prepared by Dennis Ensing,Association forBright Children of Ontario (London)and presented at the 2009 June 02 SEAC meeting. 2010 May 11...9 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd a.REPORT OF THE SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE -cont'd 6.SPECIAL EDUCATION BUDGET UPDATE -cont'd Question #1 -School Support Counsellors are specifically funded from the Pupil Foundation Grant.How/why is this in the Special Education budget? Part of the total allocation for School Support Counsellors (SSC)is funded through the Special Education grant.We have a total allocation of 44.9 SSC's within the Board.The entire department lies in Special Education for supervision purposes and the necessity of working closely with other Special Education Departments,however,ofthe total of 44.9,16.4 SSC's are funded through the Special Education budget.This allows forthe Special Education department to allocate additional support to schools where there are a number of students requiring more intensive service.The total of 16.4 represents the incremental cost of providing additional services to Special Education students.Inaddition,all 21.8 attendance counsellors are funded through the Pupil Foundation Grant.Therefore,of the 66.7 staff providing these types of service to Board students,only 16.4 are funded through the Special Education Budget. Question #2 -Professionals and para-professionals who provide support for special education... are funded through a combination of [grants].What is the apportioning rule for determining the cost sharing from the Special Education Grant. The majorityof the cost for Psychological Services and for Speech Language Pathology (SLP) Services comes out of the Special Education budget.Both departments are supervised by the Special Education Supervisors.Of the total allocation in the Board, 2.5 staff are funded by grants outside of the Special Education budget. With regard to Psych Services,the services they provide focus on meeting the needs of identified or soon-to-be-identified students;therefore,the apportioning of 21.8 out of the 23.8 members of this department would be in line for the services they are providing within Special Education. Historically,SLP was split during the Partnerships for Excellence era.At the time that PFE ceased to exist, all SLP's were brought Into Special Education,which coincided with the change in the role of the SLP, which has changed significantly.SLP's no longer focus the majority oftheir time on articulation and therapy as they once did.The focus is now on the development of oral literacy,which is one of the greatest predictors of school success.Intervention at this level, on the front end,saves the budget of the Special Education in the long run. Itis generally believed that every dollar spent on SLP between kindergarten and grade two saves six dollars later on. Question #3 -Learning Coordinators have become responsible for portfolios that are not part of Special Education.Why is Special Education carrying the full cost of these non-special education responsibilities? In Program Services,we currently have a total of 49.0 Learning Coordinators,13.0 of whom belong to the Special Education department and are funded through this budget. Most of our Special Education Learning Coordinators (LC)carry Special Education-specific portfolios/responsibilities (ie.DHH, PDD, Vision, Gifted,LD/MID,Developmental).In addition, every member of our LC team belongs to either the JK-6 or 7-12 Teams.This has been a great move forward for the department.Special Education is not an "add-on"or outside the realm of what happens for every student.We have a few of our LC's whose specific Special Education portfolio is to attend the meetings for these teams.They are not responsible for,but rather act as a resource to,these teams. 2010 May 11...10 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES-cont'd a.REPORT OF THE SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE -cont'd 6.SPECIAL EDUCATION BUDGET UPDATE -cont'd This is a very positive move for the department.The Board's focus is on literacy and all staff need to make this their top priorityintheir work with students.Alignment is key,and in an era of declining enrolment and declining budgets,we need to work smarter.Aligning our programs and needs from the outset allows us to take Into consideration the needs of all learners.It has allowed us to ensure that we incorporate strategies and programs that are "necessary for some but good for all" into the professional development and programs of the board. •K.Meeson,Manager,Financial Services provided an update on the Pupil Foundation Grant and professional and para-professional services. "Salaries and benefits for staff who provide support services to students and teachers,such as attendance counsellors,lunchroom supervisors,hall monitors,social workers,child-youth workers,community workers and computer technicians. Professional and para-professionals who provide support for special education,such as psychologists,pyschometrists,and speech pathologists,are funded through a combination of the Pupil Foundation Grant and Special Education Grant and other special purpose grants." (Ministry of Education Technical Paper 2009-2010,Spring 2009,page 18) •Funded through Pupil Foundation Grant Elementary Funding:1.73 staff per 1,000 pupils at benchmark salary and benefits of $54,385 plus 19%.Enrolment for 2009-2010:45,666.50 which equates to 79.0 staff at $4,296,415. •Secondary Funding: 2.21 staff per 1,000 pupils at benchmark salary and benefits of $54,385 plus 19%.Enrolment for 2009-2010:25,321.38 which equates to 56.0 FTE staff at $3,624,216. •Funding is a total of 135.0 FTE with salaries and benefits of $7,920,631. •The total Professionals and Para-professionals included in the 2009-2010 budget for Thames Valley District School Board:218.9 FTE with total salaries and benefits of $12,725,128. •Changes to the Ministry Special Education Budget are being released on 2010 April 16. 7.SELF CONTAINED CLASSROOM TRANSPORTATION -Deferred 8.SELF CONTAINED CLASS CHANGES 2010/2011 a.Supt.K.Edgar and J.Johnston presented an update on the Self-Contained Class changes for 2010/2011.The following was discussed: Currently the Board has 169 self-contained classrooms. Capital Planning has implications on self-contained classrooms.The Early Learning Program is having an impact on the locations of the self-contained classrooms.Supt. K.Edgar is working closely with K.Bushell,Executive Officer. The new Stoney Creek school will have a Development Centre.Three classes will move into the new site.The physical set-up will be a benefit to students. The new school in Ingersoll opening in September 2011 will have a new Development Centre with four classes. New mental health classrooms.Opening three additional classes -one at Lome Avenue and one at Westmount PS.The Secondary site has not been confirmed. 2010 May 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd a.REPORT OF THE SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE -cont'd 8.SELF CONTAINED CLASS CHANGES 2010/2011 -cont'd • Two Steps classes will be closing and supporting the needs of those students in other classrooms.Steps will be a self-contained class with an everyday model.A three block calendar is being looked at.Depending on the needs of the students they may stay for more than one block. •ISO's -out of the 15 classrooms one is running at full capacity and the other classrooms are below capacity.Classroom at Victory Memorial PS will be closing and those students placed in another classroom.This is due to having students remain in home school with assistive technology and being able to access the curriculum.Increased focus and support for assistive technology.Allocation of staff to assist students and staff on using the technology properly. •Gifted itinerant teachers -reallocation of teachers schools will meet the needs of all students. b. A review of School Health Support Services in accordance with the Ministry Policy Memorandum #81 is currently underway. This review is a joint initiativeof the Ministries of Health,Child and Youth Services and Education.School Boards and SEAC's have been asked to respond to a survey (which we have not yet received)and to consider input to the following questions: • How can the provincial government ensure that the needs of children are handled in ways that do not put them in competition for services with other segments of the community? • Howcan the provincial government through appropriate ministries best work with school boards to ensure timely access to community agencies serving children in school and at home? •What can be done to move towards a more effective model of integration among the three ministries serving the health needs of children? •What strategies will reduce fragmentation and produce the most effective levelofcontinuity of service for children and their families? •What incentives exist to ensure that provision of school health support services is based on the needs of the students? •What isthe relationship between School Health Support Services,MentalHealth Services, the Education Ministry's Student Support Leadership Initiative,Best Start, Autism Services and other specialized services for children? • Inthe jointcontext ofSchool Health Support Services, who determines the levelof services that will be provided to a child? The committee decided that due to the time frame it would be beneficial to have committee members stay after the meeting to share their input or to send a written response to the questions to Trustee Grant. 2010 May 11-12 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd a.REPORT OF THE SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE -cont'd 9.SEAC ACTION PLAN UPDATE -Survey Sub-Committee The Parent Survey Sub-Committee has met and finalized survey with Research and Assessment. The survey will be distributed by mail out to parents who have students on an lEP including a return envelope to Lucas Secondary School,Northdale Public School and Northridge Public School on 19 April2010.The survey will be returned to Research and Assessment and they will tabulate and provide a summary of answers to SEAC in early May. 10.FORUM:ASSOCIATION UPDATES OASAR Conference - Bridging the Gap -Creating Pathways and Enhancing Success for Students at Risk.22"^Annual Conference forall those working with students at risk.19 April 2010 at the Marriott Toronto Airport Hotel. London Down Syndrome Association Fundraising Event 28 May 2010 at the Shriners Hallon Colborne St.Director B.Tucker will be participating Ina panel discussion.Prime rib dinner and casino night will follow the panel discussion.Proceeds for summer camps for children with down syndrome. Adolescent Addictions (Substance,Gambling,Internet and Video Games)Keynote Speaker;Dr. Bruce Ballon.30 April 2010.Hilton Hotel,London. Online workshop "lEP 101 for Parents and Students"created by The Learning Disabilities Assoc. Of Ontario London Region.http://v\/ww.ldao.ca/courses/course_full.php?id=008 Lunch and Learn Series - 05 May 2010 "Children's Mental Health in the Education System" presented by Dr. Barrie Evans,Coordinator,Psychological Services,Thames Valley District School Board,at the Regional Mental Health Care WIckware Amphitheatre,London The Board's Equity and Inclusive Education Parent and Community Consultation.2010 May 13 at 12:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. (lunch provided)at the Hellenic Centre;2010 May 13 at 5:00 p.m. -9:00 p.m.(dinner provided)at the Hellenic Centre;and 2010 May 15 at 8:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. (Breakfast provided)at the Education Centre. Association for Bright Children - Input for the Learning for all Documents.Please contact D. Enslng. 11.FUTURE MEETING DATES The following future meetings were scheduled: 03 May 2010 -6:30 p.m. 01 June2010-11:45 a.m. 12.FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS •Ross Greene Input •E-learning •Special Education Budget Update 13.ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:26 p.m. on motion. RECOMMENDATIONS:none J.GRITZAN Chair 2010 May 11...13 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd b.REPORT OF THE LONG-TERM COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP COMMITTEE 2010 April26 3:20 p.m.-4:25 p.m. ^/lEMBERS \DMINISTRATION AND OTHERS J.Bennett P.Jaffe (3:28, -3:55)B.Tucker (-3:55) B. Noble F.Exiey T.Roberts K.Bushell K.Young (-4:15) T.Grant P.Sattler S.Christie Trustee Visitor;S.Peters Director Tucker proceeded over the meeting pending the election of the 2010 Committee Chair. 1.APPROVAL OF AGENDA -The agenda was approved. 2.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST -none declared 3.ELECTION OF 2010 COMMITTEE CHAIR Director Tucker overseen the election of the 2010 Committee Chair.Trustee Sattler was acclaimed to the position. 4.REPORT OF THE NOVEMBER 23,2009 MEETING -distributed for information 5.REPORT OF MEETING WITH MIDDLESEX COUNTY COUNCIL RE CREATING A NEW PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS a. Draft Structure for Joint Municipality/TVDSB Partnerships Director Tucker distributed the slide presentation of Middlesex County Council to develop a process forcommunity input priorto an accommodation review committee being established. He suggested that issues be presented to communities looking for issues or priorities for consideration inan administration recommendation.It was noted that it will be necessary for members of the municipalities and the Board to look at the larger picture beyond the area each member represents. 6.CITY OF LONDON COMMUNITY HUB PROCESS Leaming Supervisor B. Noble joined the meeting to discuss the City of London Community Hub Process.She distributed a London System Re engineering presentation related to neighbourhood hubs and the incoming Early Learning Program.The City of London would like centres to be govemed and administered y a lead organization that is responsible for delivering some core functions and partnering for functions that they do not provide. A hub requires 1200 square feet and 9 parking spaces. The City wants to Implement one centre,preferably in a higher needs area-the Argyle, Huron Heights or White Oaks district.Recommendations on available space were made for Lord Nelson PS,Chlppewa,Evelyn Nelson,and White Oaks Public Schools. It was questioned if the hubs must go through the facility partnerships process to access space. It was felt that the Partnerships and Sponsorship policywould apply.Trustee Jaffe inquired as to why Churchill PS was not selected as itIs included in an accommodation review. Ms. Noble will investigate and report back to the Committee.It was noted that partners in the hub are to reflect a community's need. At the City's May meeting,reports of the two school boards will be presented. 2010 May 11...14 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd b.REPORT OF THE LONG-TERM COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP COMMITTEE -cont'd 7.SURVEY RESPONSES TO CPAC SURVEY Director Tucker described the responses to the CPAC survey noting there was little Interest In maintaining the current process. 8.ENCOURAGING FACILITY PARTNERSHIPS DRAFT POLICY/PROCEDURE PublicAffairs K.Young and Exec. OfficerK.Bushell joined the meeting to present the new draft policyand procedure on Encouraging Facility Partnerships following direction received from the Ministry of Education in memo 2010:B1. It was noted that it Is not partnerships as outlined in Program but facility partnerships regarding use of schools.Public input must be received and approved bythe Board by June 30 which will require the documents being taken to the Policy Working Committee on April 27. Exec. OfficerBushell responded to members'questions. Concern was raised thatthe policy may be restrictive to educational partnerships based on the second nugget of the Guiding Principles, "educational opportunitiesare Improvedfor students In a waythat Is sustainable and supportive of student achievemenf.It was noted that the document is a compliance document based on the MOEdirection for the lease of any surplus school space.Trustee Jaffe suggested that the policy statement be amended to reflect"Asdirected bythe Ministry of Education, itis the policy of that Board that...".He asked that reference be made to the MOE direction that partnerships may not be made with private schools. Exec. Officer Bushell noted that partnerships will be based on availability considering accommodation studies. 9.OTHER BUSINESS a.Meetings with Municipalities ' Trustee Sattler Indicated that the City of Windsor also meets with their district school board trustees to discuss partnership issues. 10.NEXT MEETING DATE The next meeting was scheduled for June 1, 2010, from 4:30-6:00 p.m. At that time, the Committee will look at an alternate proposal for replacing the Capital Planning Advisory Committee. 11.ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m. by motion. RECOMMENDATIONS:none PEGGY SATTLER Chairperson c.REPORT OF THE BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2010 APRIL 26 6:00-7:55 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS F.Exley T.Roberts (ex officio) B.Tucker S.Christie T.Grant (-6:45) J.Stewart (6:06) B.Greene K.Young K.Meeson J.BerkIn S.Peters R.Tisdale (Chair)B.Hester P.Hearse Trustee Visitor:J.Bennett J 2010 May 11...15 16.REPORTS OF COWIWIITTEES -cont'd c.REPORT OF THE BUDGET ADVISORY COWIWIITTEE -cont'd 1.APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved by motion. 2.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST -none declared 3.2010 PRELIMINARY BUDGET DISCUSSION Exec. Supt.Greene advised members that the draft Budget Assumptions and Process will be available for trustees at the April 27 Board meeting. The comments from principals related to budget priorities were presented to the Committee. Manager Meeson described issues related to the following areas identified by the school administrators.An overview of the input will be provided to the Committee. •Casual accounts -increase funds in the Casual accounts to provide funds to replace staff as required •Professional Development -redirect PD funds to assist in funding a vice-principal or bring in a retired principal to replace administrators when itis necessary to attend out-of-school meetings -provide training during the summer session with pay •Generating Funds -examine partnerships with businesses -consider sponsorships as Board money to ensure equity -promote the Gifts to Schools fund - invest in solar panels on schools to get offthe grid as applicable to generate savings and sell excess energy -lease properties for sale for solar panel fields -have employees problem solve for system saving ideas -investigate corporate sponsorship -increase the cost of use of facilities to community groups •Facilities -drop temperatures -close school for additional weeks in winter and two additional in summer to save energy costs •Special Education -more EA support for high need students •Labour -have Board staff do repairs at schools rather than hiring contractors •ELP -system supervisor for ELP for before and after program •TVNELP -review need for seconded co-ordinator Purchasing Warehouse -examine the tendering process -provide the freedom to purchase goods at lower prices - look at better buys system-wide 2010 May 11...16 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd c.REPORT OF THE BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE -cont'd 3.2010 PRELIMINARY BUDGET DISCUSSION -cont'd •Coterminous Board - Are there any programs or services that can be shared to save money? -Can the system become one? - Why do some students transfer to the separate board? •Chartwells - eliminate secondary contracts and train students to run the cafeteria program • Doing more with less -communicate that the Board is doing more with less •Itinerant Staff/PD -late entry times to meetings,dates to schools •PD -have early dismissal to allow for PD meetings •Sale of assets - liquidate surplus properties held by the Board •Retired teachers -take retired teachers off the supply list ^ Feedback will be provided to principals at the MayPD meeting providinga summary and Issues going forward. The list will be taken toAdministrative Council.Trustees presented the following suggestions for consideration; •have social workers for the Reconnect and Alternative Education; •ensure staffing for secondary schools is adequate; •reading recovery expansion to more schools; •deal with waiting list for at risk students; •investigate alternative means of providing services not directly connected to student achievement; •have consistent bargaining unit increases and address the proposed wage freeze; •address the cost of video streaming Board meetings; •adopt an holistic approach to system staffing. 4.OTHER BUSINESS a.Administration and Trustee Priorities The following Administration and Trustee priorities were identified for discussion and/or consideration in the Budget process: •secondary staffing; •Reading Recovery expansion; •social worker for Reconnect program; • wait listfor at risk students Questions to be asked:Is there a waiting list? Ifyes, what areas of the budget might need to be addressed to significantly reduce or eliminate the waiting list?; •casual accounts; •video conferencing; •ELP staffing. 2010 May 11...17 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd c.REPORT OF THE BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE -cont'd 3.2010 PRELIMINARY BUDGET DISCUSSION -cont'd b.Process Director Tucker indicated that a process for addressing key aspects of the budget will be established,e.g.use of reserves and the Early Learning Program.At each Board meeting, a Budget component will be included to discuss their implications.The issue ofdeficitfunding related to ELP staffing was described.The following issues will be discussed at the May 11 and May 25 Board meetings: • May 11 - ELP -Potential Additions • May 25 -Use of Reserves Issues will be considered for inclusion in the 2010-11 Budget and added by motion. Public input will be sought at the Information Committee of the Whole meeting on June 1 at 7:00 p.m. c.Revenue Sources It was suggested that additional revenue sources be investigated,e.g.advertising in schools, erecting solar panels,hiring students to conduct services.Issues of commercialization were raised.It was noted that fundraising is at the schools'discretion and not considered to be part of central funds. It was noted that it will be necessary to conduct business differently in the future to generate additional funds and suggested that discussions be held with the MOE regarding the definition of competing entities. 5.NEXT MEETING The next meeting was scheduled for May 18 at 5:30 p.m. 6.ADJOURNMENT A motion to adjourn was moved and carried at 7:55 p.m. Notifications for the 2010 June 1 public input meeting have been communicated through email to school and employee groups as well as advertisements in newspapers. The trustees were invited to attend the Budget Advisory Committee meeting on 2010 May 18 at 5:30 p.m. Trustee Tisdale and Director Tucker explained the process of receiving and responding to budget suggestions from the Board Staff. It was noted that some of the suggestions have already been incorporated in the system priorities while some require further investigation and some will be received with thanks but not acted upon. RECOMMENDATIONS:none RUTH TISDALE Chairperson 2010 May 11...18 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES-cont'd d.REPORT OF THE POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE 2010 APRIL 27 2:09 -5:00 p.m. MEMBERS ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS T.Grant (Chair)T.Roberts B.Tucker S.Christie J.Bennett R.Tisdale M.Sereda K.Wilkinson P.Martin B.Greene Regrets:S.Doub P.Tufts K.Young B.Sonier M.Straatman Trustee Visitors:P.Jaffe,G.Hart (3:00)M. Moynihan P.Heath N.Fader 1.APPROVAL OF AGENDA -The agenda was approved by motion. 2.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST-none declared 3.COMMITTEE REPORT OF MARCH 23,2010.ANDTRACKING SHEET-provided for information 4.POLICY/PROCEDURE-TO COMMITTEE FOLLOWING PUBLIC INPUT a.Attendance Support Program Policy and Procedure Manager P. Martin and M.Straatman joined the meeting to report on public input received while the Attendance Support Program policy and procedure were posted to the Board's website for input.Manager Martin described the Input noting it was requested that the documents be written in a supportive manner,that absences reported be for illness only,and that a statement of confidentiality for medical information be included. Manager Martin described additional changes to the policy and procedure following feedback from the unions.The Board's solicitor has reviewed the documents and is supportive of the changes.Director Tucker thanked the staff for their efforts in developing the policy and procedure. The following motion was moved and carried: That the Attendance Support Program policy be forwarded to the May 11,2010 Board meeting for approval and the procedure for Information. Once the policy is approved by the Board,an information brochure will be made available to staff and in-service for supervisors and unions will be conducted. b.Attendance Areas for Students Policy and Procedure Supts.M.Moynihan and K.Wilkinson joined the meeting to present public input on the Attendance Areas for Students policy and procedure.Supt.Moynihan noted that one response from an individual suggested that all students should be transported to any school they choose,regardless of school designation.As this is contrary to current practice and the practice has been delineated more clearly within the amended procedure,that input was not incorporated into the policy. 2010 May 11...19 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd d.REPORT OF THE POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE -cont'd 4.POLICY/PROCEDURE-TO COMMITTEE FOLLOWING PUBLIC INPUT -cont'd b.Attendance Areas for Students Policy and Procedure -cont'd Responding toa question as towhyan annual request from parents must be submitted,itwas noted that class caps must be respected and that family circumstances change. Responsibility has been transferred to the principalto identify students wishingto return to the school to determine numbers and any out-of-area exemptions to be considered rather than requiring parents to contact the school each year. This will ensure that implementation ofthe procedure is as equitable as possible.The connection with the Transportation policy was noted. Concern was raised over not allowing a student a full exemption,i.e. having to apply to attend a school outside of the school attendance area on an annual basis.The need for principals to be able to operationally review their student registration was stressed.Concern was also noted that the appeal process is through those who make the original attendance decisions as wellthe need forsensitivity around a requirement for parents to share personal information numerous times. The following motion was moved and rejected: That the Attendance Areas for Students policy be forwarded to the May 11,2010 Board for approval and the procedure for information. The following motion was moved and carried: That the Attendance Areas for Students policyand procedure be forwarded to the May 11, 2010 Board for information. c.Records Information Management Procedure Director Tucker advised that during the public input period, no input was received on the Records Information Management procedure. The following motion was moved and carried: That the Records Information Management procedure be forwarded to the May 11,2010, Board meeting for information. d. Bullying Prevention and Intervention Policy and Procedure e. Disciplineand Promotion Positive Student Behaviour Policyand Procedure (Safe Schools) Supt.B.Sonier joined the meeting to advise the Committee that no public input was received on the Bullying Prevention and Intervention policy and procedure or the Discipline and Promotion Positive Student Behaviour policy and procedure during the period it was posted to the Board's website.She advised that both procedures were amended priorto the posting to Indicate that reports where no action was taken with a student are to be retained for the current year plus one and the name of the person who reported is to be removed from the form before itis filed in the student's GSR.This Information has been provided previously to trustees as the policies were to be in place by the end of January.Copies of the changes are attached. 2010 May 11...20 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd d.REPORT OF THE POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE -cont'd 4.POLICY/PROCEDURE-TO COMMITTEE FOLLOWING PUBLIC INPUT-cont'd f.Risk of Violence Procedure Supt.Sonier spoke to the posting of the Risk of Violence procedure noting no public Input was received during the posting process.The document has been implemented and has been well received by the system.She noted that a coloured folder will be included in a student's GSR for Safe Schools information. It was suggested and agreed that the note in Section 2 of the procedure related to when to call the police will be moved to the beginning of the document for prominence. The following motion was moved and carried: That the Risk of Violence Procedure,as amended,be forwarded to the May 11,2010, Board meeting for Information. g.Harassment Procedure Supt.M.Sereda and P.Heath joined the meeting to present public input received from a parent and an individual on the Harassment procedure.The input was reviewed noting no changes to the procedure were recommended. It was suggested that Safe Schools issues be pulled together and incorporated into one document for ease of reference.Exec.Supt.Sereda will seek Administrative Council input in this regard. It was noted that electronic contact related to Facebook,MSN,texting,etc.will be referenced under the section "Personal Harassment Includes:"It was suggested and agreed that domestic violence will be addressed in the procedure as itis also a component of harassment. It will be cross referenced once Bill 168 is proclaimed.Exec.Supt.Sereda advised that training will be provided to all employees.The approved revisions will be emailed to the Committee prior to being referred to the Board. The following motion was moved and carried: That the Harassment procedure be forwarded to the May 11,2010,Board meeting for Information. 5.NEW POLICIES/PROCEDURES UNDER DEVELOPMENT a.Privacy and Access Procedure Director Tucker presented the draft Privacy and Access procedure noting it is based on the 10 privacy commitments approved in the Privacy and Records Information Management policy and Incorporates direction around privacy issues addressed by the PIM (Privacy Information Management)Task force and includes resources from the PIM toolkit. The Information Privacy Commissioner has asked that ail Institutions governed by the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act to commit to embedding privacy practices in all of their operations.This procedure Includes direction on issues affecting the day-to-day protection of privacy for students,staff and third parties to the Board. It is anticipated that the procedure will be a living document to be revised as additional issues are identified.It has been written to be consistent with other board procedures which include privacy issues,e.g.Technology Security,Video Surveillance. 2010 May 11...21 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd d.REPORT OF THE POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE -cont'd 5.NEW POLICIES/PROCEDURES UNDER DEVELOPMENT -cont'd a.Privacy and Access Procedure -cont'd The following motion was moved and carried: That the Privacy and Access procedure be posted to the Board's website for 60 days for public input. b.Encouraging Facility Partnerships Policy and Procedure PublicAffairs Manager K.Youngjoined the meeting to present the draft policyand procedure on Encouraging Facility Partnerships.She advised that the procedures follow the direction received from the Ministry of Education in memo 2010:B1 to establish facility partnerships regarding use of schools.Manager Young indicated that partnerships will be based on availability considering accommodation studies. Wording revisions were suggested.Concern was raised over the guiding principle "future enrolment projections indicate the student population can be sustained"questioning the word "sustained"and suggesting "accommodated".Itwas agreed to amend the itemto read "future enrolment projections indicate:the student population can be accommodated and the student program can be sustained."It was suggested and agreed to include a statement that the Board will determine suitable facility partners. The Directorof Education will determine eligibility ofall applicants for Board approval.It was noted that a presentation or public meeting is to be held on the documents before June 30. The following motion was,therefore,moved and carried to limitpublic input to 30 days: That the Encouraging Facility Partnerships policyand procedure be posted to the Board's website for 30 days for public input. 6.DRAFT POLICY/PROCEDURE REQUIRING ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION -none 7.POLICIES/PROCEDURES UNDER REVISION a. Naming of Schools Procedure Supt. P. Tufts and N.Fader joined the meeting to present revisions to the Naming of Schools procedure following trustees'request that the procedure be amended to clarify the process and roles ofcommittee members.Supt. Tufts noted that the procedure identifies voting and non-voting members of a Naming Committee,clarifies the guidelines surrounding the review of suggested names,provides for necessary contact with family members ifa personal name is suggested.It also clarifies the role ofthe trustee as a non- votingparticipantand the superintendent as a resource.The principal mayalso attend as a non-voting resource to the Committee. It was agreed that the Naming Committee's approval is contingent on the familyapproving the use of a individual's name where such has been submitted.Discussion followed regarding the family being contacted prior to the Committee considering an individual's name. It was also suggested that an attempt be made to advise the family where the name of a school representing an individual may potentially change.It was agreed that in these cases,this should be completed when the Naming Committee is being established. 2010 May 11...22 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd d.REPORT OF THE POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE -cont'd 7.POLICIES/PROCEDURES UNDER REVISION -cont'd a.Naming of Schools Procedure -cont'd It was questioned Ifthe report to the Board regarding the work of the NamingCommittee is a committee report or an administrative report. It was suggested that the trustee serve as a non-voting chair ofthe Committee, similarto the accommodation reviewcommittee process and,therefore,be considered a Committee report. The report will come from the committee, written by the Administration,and approved and presented by the trustee Chair. This clarification will be added to the procedure. Itwas questioned what is an "area" when looking for representatives to sit on a Naming Committee.Itwas clarified that the Committee will have two parent representatives who have children who will go to the destination school. It was further questioned if parents of out-of- area students are eligible to sit on a Naming Committee.It was agreed that one of the two representatives must be a parent of a child(ren)in the school community and the other could be a community member.Revisions will be brought back to the Committee at itsnext meeting for consideration. b.Reporting Child Neglect and Abuse Procedure Supt.L.Griffith-Jones and Employee Relations Officer J. King joined the meeting to describe the Reporting Child Neglect and Abuse procedure noting changes reflect changes in the legislation to ensure that the procedure is representative of current Board and Children's Aid Society reporting and process practices when a report of suspected child neglect and abuse is made.The Elgin,Middlesex and London Children's Aid Societies have participated in ^ developing revisions to be consistent in practices. Supt.Griffith-Jones described the changes noting that responsibility for administering the procedure will be transferred to Human Resource Services.All employees will receive annual training on the document and information has been sent to TVPIC and all employee groups. It was noted that reference should be made to third party participation.Supt.Griffith-Jones responded to members'questions. The following motion was moved and carried: That the Reporting Child Neglect and Abuse procedure be posted to the Board's website for 30 days for public input. 8.DRAFT/APPROVED POLICY/PROCEDURE REQUIRING FURTHER CONSlDERATION-none 9.OTHER BUSINESS a.Member Resignation Trustee Jaffe advised of his resignation from the Committee. A replacement will be sought through the Chairs'Committee. 10.DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING The next meeting will be held on Tuesday,May 25 in the Governor Simcoe Room. 11.ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned by motion at 5:00 p.m. Trustee Grant invited Interested trustees to submit their name to Sue Pullam to fill the position vacated by Trustee Jaffe prior to the Chairs'Committee meeting of 2010 May 19. 2010 May 11...23 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd d.REPORT OF THE POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE -cont'd RECOMMENDATIONS: 1.That the Attendance Support Program policy be approved. 2. That the Attendance Areas for Students policy and procedure be referred back to Administration. Recommendations 1 and 2 were approved on motion byT. Grant,seconded byJ. Bennett. TRACY GRANT Chairperson e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 2010 MAY 04 7:03 P.M.-8:59 P. MEMBERS ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS J.Bennett S.Peters B.Tucker M.E.Smith S.Doub S.Polhill K.Dalton B.Sonier T.Grant (Chair)T.Roberts B.Greene P.Tufts G.Hart P.Sattler M.Sereda J.Berkin W.Huff J.Stewart C.Bourbonnais-MacDonald K.Bushell P.Jaffe R.Tisdale K.Edgar S.Christie J.Kamphuis L.Griffith-Jones H.Gerrits C.Neville S.Hughes S.Macey M. Moynihan K.Meeson V.Nielsen K.Young Regrets:F.Exiey J.Marlborough 1.APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved by motion. 2.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Trustee Jaffe declared a conflict of Interest on staffing school psychologists citing family employment. 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET Exec. Supt. B.Greene presented the preliminarybudget for2010-11. He indicated that Ontario has felt the effects of the global recession and is running a deficit In order to create jobs and protect public services.He advised the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST)will come into effect on 2010 July 1 and the impact on school boards is unknown at this time. Exec. Supt.Greene advised that declining enrolment is projected to continue until 2013.The decline for 2010-2011 is projected as follows: FTE Students Elementary 538.50 Secondary 365.50 Total:904.00 The following items were highlighted: •There will be continued short term and permanent grant reductions inthe GSN's; •2010-11 is Year 3 of the Provincial Framework Agreements (PFA's); •Cost of Year 3 labour agreements are funded; 2010 May 11...24 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -cont'd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd • Financial impact of the Early Learning Program (ELP)year 1 of a 5 year implementation; •2009-10 Budget approval; •Use of one-time reserves $1.6M - not permanent; •Ministry Measures in place if use of reserves exceeds 1% of operating revenue; • Ministry approval required if: •the deficit is structural in nature; • it represents high financial risk that places future balanced budgets at risk. DIRECTOR'S SERVICES Director Tucker described Records Information Management (RIM)staffing with the extension of temporary RIM assistant to permanent status effective September,2010,as well as two RIM clerks, previously approved,effective September 2010 to August 2012. OPERATIONS SERVICES Exec.Supt.K.Dalton described the ONSIS clerical staff requirements.MISA funding has ended forthese staff;therefore,Operations will investigate efTiciencies In the department to cover the costs of two part- time and two full-time clerks. HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICES Exec.Supt.M.Sereda outlined Human Resource Services system phorities ofDisabilityManagement and Staffing Software to allowthe Board to be more efficientwith elementary staffing. Also discussed was a pilot Employee Wellness Program for the Board's consideration. BUSINESS SERVICES Exec.Supt.B.Greene described capital planning noting the following: •continue to work as a member of the Capital Planning Co-ordinating Committee; •develop the capital planning priorities for submission to the Ministryof Education; •develop a funding plan for the Ministry of Education funding template transportation,and financial accountability. Transportation •Implement the Board approved new harmonized walking distances (1.6 km -Elementary and 3.2 km -Secondary)effective September 2010 •Implement transportation services for the new school and consolidations as of September 2010 Financial Accountability •Implement the regional internal audit program operating as the host board •Enhance financial reporting and accountability measures PROGRAM SERVICES Supt. V. Nielsen highlighted the following Program Services system priorities. •Curriculum •Targeted Interventions for Literacy -maintain coaches,reading support teachers at same staffing level, (but new model of deployment to increase the number of schools which will receive support) •Teaching Learning Critical Patfiways (TLCP's)in every elementary school and release time to support all teachers •Learning Classrooms,secondary -keep for next year •Release time for secondary teachers to support visits to Learning Classrooms and for Professional LearningCycles (PLC's) Inall schools (funding for SSSSI schools will come from targeted grant) •Support forBoard Improvement Plan for Student Achievement-Literacyand Numeracy (new goal for BIP?) • School Reviews;Gap areas - ELL's,Students with special needs;Aboriginal;and Gender 2010 May 11...25 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES-cont'd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -cont'd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd PROGRAM SERVICES -cont'd Curriculum Rollout-September 2010 Growing Success implementation - new assessment and evaluation Ministry Policy document (including new report card implementation) EnvironmentalEducation Policy-revise based onActingToday,Shaping Tomorrow-implementation in all schools Grades 1-8 and Health and PE (2010)and new curriculum implementation Expansion of Dual Credits (Fanshawe College and Lambton College) Expansion of Specialist High Skills Majors (SHSM)- funded through targeted grants and program budgets Fullday learning new curriculum/program implementation -ECE's and teachers Equity and Inclusive Education Ministry Strategy and Boand Policy - implementation of program initiatives outlined inAction Plan (to date,no funding has been received for 2010-11) Food and Beverage Ministry Policy -implementation in all schools Learning for/A//-implementation in all schools Curriculum • TVNELP -Ready for School • Health &Safety -equipment repairs for Phys Ed, Art,Tech Studies •Athletics/programs for special needs students •Technological Studies program implementation Review (future implications) •Vocational Program Review (future implications) Information Technology,Library and Media •ICT Strategic Plan to support school and system goals •Wireless access for schools to promote anytime,anywhere learning • Quality of hardware •Remote access and videoconferencing (with reduced PD funds) • Trainingrelated to student achievement (through newand existingtechnologies),BIP and student engagement •ITS Admin budget to support operational commitments, Wide Area Network,Internet connections, voice telecommunications for schools,offices,hardware,maintenance • Mediabudget to support learning resources,videostreaming,library circulationhardware and licence renewals,online educational databases for schools,training for teacher-librarians •Issues and challenges;continuing reduction of $1 million from Ministry funding, new report card implementation Special Education •lEP software implementation - training required for September 2010 •Learning for All on-going implementation • Mental Health - to support student ($200,000 annually)-system strategy • Applied Behavioural Analysis •Streamline program and staffing to reduce travel expenses •EA's for Early Learning Program •Database for Note taking/reports for special education staff GRANTS FOR STUDENT NEEDS (GSN) HIGHLIGHTS Exec. Supt.Greene and Manager K.Meeson presented the GSN highlights. •Provincial Framework Agreement • Funding for Provincial Framework Agreement (PFA) •Compensation increases •Increases to staffing under PFA Enhancements •School Operations - 2%increase to non-staff benchmarks • Community Use of Schools -Increase to cover inflation 2010 May 11...26 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES-cont'd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -confd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd GRANTS FOR STUDENT NEEDS (GSN)HIGHLIGHTS -cont'd Special Education • Introduction of Behaviour Expertise Amount (BEA) •Continued support of Measures of Variability (MOV) •Introduction of MOV Special Education Statistical Prediction Model •Transition support - 50% of High Needs Amount (HNA)stabilization •Support Special Incidence Portion (SIP)claim-based applications •Introduction of Special Equipment Amount (SEA)Per Pupil Amount and continue SEA claims based applications •Stable support for government-approved care and/or treatment,custody and correctional facilities Student Transportation •Cost benchmarks increased 2% •Continuation of Fuel Escalator and De-escalator • 1%reduction in transportation allocation to Boards receiving less than "High"rating on Effectiveness and Efficiency reviews (E&E) •Reduction in Stable Funding Guarantees •50%of enrolment decline. Structural Changes • Pupil Foundation Grant •Primary Pupil Foundation Allocation - JK - 3 average class size 19.8 :1 •Junior/Intermediate Pupil Foundation Allocation -4-8 average class size 24.8 :1 • Early Learning Program (ELP) - Additional half-day of core ELP outside GSN •Update to 2006 Census Data •Learning Opportunities Grant (LOG) • English as a Second Language (ESL) •Safe Schools MinistryEfficiency and Savings 2009-2010 •Classroom Computers -Second and final year of reduction in Pupil Foundation Grant •Staff Development -Restored through Pupil Foundation Grant at previous benchmark level MinistryEfficiency and Savings 2010-2011 •Reduction in Stable Funding Guarantees - High Needs Amount •50%of enrolment decline •School Operations and Renewal Top-Up •20-18%in 2010-2011 •18-15%in 2011-2012 • New school for first 5 years - no top-up funding •Board Administration •Reduction of 2%per pupil benchmarks •Further reductions 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 Capital •Accounting changes and Capital wrap-up •Primary Class Size (PCS)capital •Capital Funding -Allocate funding to most urgent and pressing capital needs •Energy Efficiency Funding •Second year funding -outside GSN • Early Learning Capital -Address Capital Needs related to ELP 2010 May 11...27 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES-cont'd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -cont'd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd GRANTS FOR STUDENT NEEDS (GSN)HIGHLIGHTS -cont'd Transfers into GSN's •School Effectiveness Leads and Framework Release Time •Allocated as part of Learning Opportunities Grant (LOG) •Ontario Focused Intervention Partnership (OFIP)Tutoring •Per-pupil amount through LOG •Specialist High Skills Major •Table amount allocated as component of LOG •Special Education -Behaviour Expertise Amount (BEA) • Hire staff with Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA)expertise •Educational Programs -Other (EPO's) • Funding of other education initiatives outside GSN's to advance student achievement-2010:B6Memo $2.6M Examples; Parenting &Family Literacy Centres $320,330 OFIP $373,003 Math &Literacy Professional Learning Strategy $208,272 • MinistryApproval Process •Changes to reporting in 2010 -2011 •Improve financial transparency and accountability •Budget compliance to Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) •Boards will recognize the value of their Tangible Capital Assets (TCA) •Amortization of these assets will appear as an operating expense. Exec. Supt.Greene described the per pupil funding model and the impact of declining enrolment.He explained the process of calculating the preliminary budget projected grants,noting that the projected amount will change. PRELIMINARY BUDGET PROJECTED -ENROLMENT 2010-2011 Estimate 2009-2010, Approved Budget Diiference JK to Grade 3 19,064.50 19,153.50 (89.00) Grade 4 to 8 26,063.50 26,513.00 (449.50) Elementary 45,128.00 45,666.50 (538.50) Secondary 24,955.79 25,321.38 (365.59) Total Enrolment 70,083.79 70,987.88 (904.09) 2010iVIav11...28 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES-cont'd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -cont'd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd 2009-10 TO 2013-14 PROJECTED AVERAGE DAILY TOTAL ENROLMENT 72,000 71,000 V 70,000 69i000 68,000 67,000 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 PRELIMINARY BUDGET PROJECTED GRANTS Presented in OOO's of dollars 2010-2011 .2009-2010 Estimated Approved Budget Budget Difference Pupil Foundation -Elementary 188,434 190,681 (2.247) Pupil Foundation -Secondary 133,121 135,190 (2,069) Total Pupil Foundation Grant 321,555 325,871 (4,316) Special Education Grant 80,599 81,131 (532) Teacher Q&E Grant 45,405 46,019 (613) School Operations Grant 63,104 63,828 (724) Other Operating Grants 153,213 153,185 28 Total Operating Grants 663.876 670,034 (6,157) Note:Based on 2009-2010 GSN's PRELIMINARY BUDGET PROJECTED SHORTFALL Impact of Declining Enrolment Net0 perating Grants for Student Needs (6,157) Reduced Requirements for Teachers 3,465 (2,692) Projected Decreases in Revenue Transportation Grant Funding Board and Admin.Allocation Top Up Funding Net Effect of School Closures (598) (275) (955) (432)(2,260) 2009-2010 Budget Items that affect 2010-2011 Budget Multi-purpose Reserve Fund (459) Reserve Transfer - 2008-09 Year End Surplus (1,000) Working Fund Reserxe (156) Preliminary Projected Budget Shortfall (1,615) (6,567) 2010 May 11...29 16.REPORTS OF COWIIWITTEES -confd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -cont'd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd PRELIMINARY BUDGET SYSTEM PRIORITIES System Priorities Reduction in Accounts Ops Services 135 MISA Staffing No Longer Covered by EPO (131) Records Information Fees 20 Records Information Staff (3.0 PTE)123 Staffing Software (33) Disability Management (180) Video Streaming (17) 1.0 FTE Supervisor - ELF TBD 1.0 FTE Social Worker -Middlesex (97) 1.0 FTE Social Worker -Reconnect (97) Additional Secondary Staffing TBD Expansion of Reading Recovery TBD Review of Waiting Lists -"At Risk"Students TBD Review of Casual Accounts TBD Total System Priorities (523) Additional Items for Consideration Employee Wellness Program (103) {4241 (Tim (1,238) PRELIMINARY BUDGET POTENTIAL BUDGET SOLUTIONS Manager Meeson described potential budget solutions. Presented in OOO's of dollars Current Potential Budget Available Solution Balance Comments Reserves WSIB 4,124 Multi-purpose 2,742 Property Loss 785 PA/P/SO PD 576 SO Retirement Gratuity 546 Other Student Literacy 500 Mercer Balance 2,600 2009-10 Surplus TBD Professional De\®lopment Total 11,873 Actuarial report values liability at $6.6 million Working fund surplus To fund $100,000 deductible Carryforward of unspent allocations To fund cost of future SO retirements Funds are used to support school-based TLCP Required to retain minimum balance Dependent on current operating results Partial restoration of PD funding in GSN -$791,000 2010 May 11...30 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -cont'd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd SCHOOL CONSOLIDATION SAVINGS -NET PERMANENT SAVINGS BY DEPARTMENT Exec. Officer K. Bushell higlilighted the school consolidation savings. Human info i . ; Project Resource Facilitlesi 1 Transp.Tech Purch.,Media Services Services Sennces Seh/ices Services .Ser^'ces other Total PETrudeau 997,661 6,058 122,000 11,519 372 250 d.1,137,860 JohnWIse ,(164,962)(88;312);41,225 11,519;0 250'0 ;(200,280) Blenheim.113,129 {50;116)'(17,000)1,439 844:250 0 ; 48,546 Wilberforce 421,256 93,719 :85,681 13,354 1,593 500 0 :616,103 WestNissouri 224,850 25,517 7,879 1,439 472 250 0 ^260,407 &st Oxford 240,932 40,776 0 7i75i 372 250 0 '290,081 total All 1,832,866 27,642 :239,785 i !47,021 3,653 1,750 0 '2,152,717 Summarv Board Savings |-^>69,13^239,785 47.021 ;(103^844)281,489 MOE Saving's '':i#87o;2i5-^J^O!P03f844f ^974,059; Redeployed 893,516 -/-yOr,•IS3-653:I*IS 897,169 Total All 1,832;866 •""'2^1121 239;785 at¥;756'^0 2,152,717 Note:Does not include any amounts for the change in Top-up grants. EARLY LEARNING PROGRAM (ELP)FOR 4 & 5 YEAR OLDS Supt.C.Bourbonnais-MacDonald outlined the following highlights of the ELP. Full Day Early Learning Phased-in implementation over five years,starting with the 2010-11 school year. 19 School Sites -52 Classrooms •The program has two major components: Core Day Extended Day Core Day •Offered each school day •Educator team • 1 Teacher • 1 Early Childhood Educator (ECE) 26 Students -average class size •Extended Day •Available before and after school Participation -option of parents and guardians •Boards offer the program if there is sufficient enrolment •Funded through parent fees -cost recovery 2010 May 11...31 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -cont'd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd EARLY LEARNING -PROGRAM MODEL QieCty Tre Rtgan RtgarHus EybeS/bRcgai The Regan 715 73)8 9 1 mbe RcgarHus 15nre IShus 1 2 21E33X I I I I ^I I I Gbelfy 65)uj5 330 4 5 53D 6 015 I 1 I Aor Y 25fius Qgs 15nre Tn® Rtgan 715 730 8 9 -D 11 1t15 12 1230 1 2 at 3 33D 4 5 S3D 6 615 I I I 1 1 I I I J L Rep RqgarHus "BifB tShojs V. ^-SE 3^-EE RcgarAadat —Y— 15tos Qje[fy GShus 7hDus 17^ 7Itus /Det Y 25hcu5 2Kus Ocee 15nre EARLY LEARNING PROGRAM CORE DAY PROJECTED REVENUES ^V 'Ministry FundingMinistryRevenueCategory«x j ^>'o 'per Student ! Projected Total Revenue ^ ii B12.Appendix3 ]1j184 Pupils Teachers 1,205 1,426,507 ECEs 1,636 1,936,468 Staffing Total 2,840 3,362,974 Supply Teachers 60 71,407 Professional Learning 8 9,010 Professionals and Para-Professlonals 58 68,447 Staff Development 6 6,512 Elementary Supervision 13 15,913 Textbooks and Learning Materials 35 40,848 Classroom Supplies 41 49,029 Classroom Computers 17 20,436 Other GSN Costs Total 238 281,803 Special Education Per-Pupll Amount (SEPPA)392 463,986 School Operations (Facilities)358 423,564 Estimated Revenues before TQ&E Grant 3,828 4,532,127 Teacher Qualifications &Experience Grant 179 211,694 Estimated Revenues 4,007 4,743,821 2010 Mav11...32 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -cont'd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd EARLY LEARNING PROGRAM CORE DAY PROJECTED EXPENDITURES Expenditure Category Projected Exp. Per Pupil Projected Expenditures Teacher Costs 2,201 2,605,514 ECE Costs 2,112 2,500,349 Other Expenditures 819 969,153 Estimated Expenditures $5,131 $6,075,015 Estimated Revenues $4,007 $4,743,821 Estimated Surpius/(Shortfall)$(1,124)$(1,331,195) EARLY LEARNING PROGRAM BEFORE &AFTER PROGRAM FEES (1) (2) (3) (4) (A) (B) (C) Ministiy Sample Fee TVDSB Estimated Fee Wage compensation 7.50 10.21 TotaiCE/staff Costs 11.29 14.00 lbchooi(cperattonsi(i!;tilitiesWcustodiai)l guns Materials for extended day 1.00 1.00 Food /snacks 2.00 2.00 Estimated cost (1+2+3+4)17.29 20.00 Vacancy allowance (10%) Administration (Fee collection, etc.) 1.73 0.35 2.00 0.40 Estimated Fees (A+B+C)$19.37 $22.40 IGreenisJheesitnatlcannntJhPilariiiiRtfidM Fees iProgram Hours Before Program $8.40 7:30 -9:00AM After Program $14.00 3:30-6:00PM Total Fee &Hours $22.40 4.0 Hours Ministryof Education Requirements • The Ministry ofEducationMemo 2010:EL2 and Bill 242 providedetailswith respect tothe calculationand setting of fees for the extended day portion of ELP. •Fees are intended to recover costs associated with the extended day program. Extended day fees are not to be subsidized by other Board revenues. Fees are not to be designed to raise additional resources to supplement other Board revenues or offset school day costs. Boards are required to setfees annually and approve them through a regular,open meeting ofthe Board. •Boards are required to publish fees for extended day programs on the Board website. 2010 May 11...33 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd e.REPORT OF THE INFORMATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -cont'd 3.2010-11 PRELIMINARY BUDGET -cont'd IMPORTANT DATES Manager Meeson noted the following Budget planning dates; •2010 June 01 -Presentation of Preliminary Budget and Public Input •2010 June 15 -Special Board Meeting -Budget •2010 June 22 - Final Budget Approval •2010 June 30 -Submission to the Ministryof Education. Chair Grant thanked the presenters for the very thorough budget presentation and information. In response to questions,the following Information was provided: •The Board pays a set premium to WSIB Liability based on the Boards'schedule two classification.There Is a reserve in the event of any potential claims. •The school foundation grant pays for one principal,one secretary and money toward school supplies and a vice-principal depending on enrolment. • It was noted if ELP registrations exceed the number of students the Ministry will fund,the students must reside within the school boundary/designated area in order to be accepted in the school. •GSN efficiency and savings applies to new schools only. •It was noted that the projected shortfall may change when final numbers are in place.It was explained that the majority of school boards are projecting a shortfall as a result of the ELP. The Ministry's maximum class size expectation is that no class will be over 30 students, however,because of contractual agreements,the Board isobligated to adhere toa maximum class size of 24 students. •The enrolment projection for the JK -Grade 3 is calculated at 0.5 FTE. •The Middlesex Social Worker position of 1.0 will be clarified to the trustees • It Is not the Boards'intention to move Junior or intermediate 'out-of-area'students back to their home schools unless the school has a dramatic increase In enrolment. •The Board does not expect to have the same energy savings as was experienced in the previous year. •The Special Education allocation is part of budget building process. •Aboriginal data has been updated to census data. •The fee structure for the Before and After will be paid on a monthly basis to be paid one month In advance.The Vacancy'amount will offset delinquent payments.It is anticipated that the Board will bill the Municipality for subsidized parents for the Before and After program. Registration deadline for the Before and After program is 2010 June 1,however,unique situations will be considered and assessed separately.Program Services will be receiving needs assessment surveys shortly and will determine the Before and After School program needs at that time.There has been discussions with the Catholic Board regarding common rates. •Mercer's balance Is approximately $1.3 million dollars. •There are community partners where ECE's are not unionized will become unionized and this Is anticipated to Increase their salary rate by $5.00 per hour. • A portion of Consolidation Savings maybe used forcapitalprojectsand a portion maybeused to reduce the deficit. •labour costs compared to catholic board costs?Trying to have a common rates 4.ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:59 p.m. by motion. TRACY GRANT Chairperson It was noted that Employee Wellness Program, ifapproved, would be a pilot project only. Program success/failure could only be determined with long-term tracking. 2010 May 11...34 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES-cont'd f.REPORT OF THE CHAIRS'COMMITTEE 2010 MAY 05 9:00-11:06 a.m. MEMBERS ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS T.Roberts (Chair)J.Bennett B.Tucker J.Marlborough T.Grant J.Stewart (via M.Sereda -9:36 teleconference)-10:14 1.APPROVAL OF AGENDA -The agenda was approved. 2.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST -none declared 3.REVIEW OF MAY 11,2010,BOARD AGENDA The agendas forthe In-camera and public Board meetings of 2010 May 11 were discussed and updated. A request to present to trustees at the 2010 May 11 Board meeting regarding the recommendations around accommodation studies,London City Council action and Thames Valley Board support was discussed and approved. 4.PERSONNEL MATTER The Committee moved In camera bymotion at 9:10 a.m.to discuss a personnel matter.Amotion to reconvene in public session was approved at 9:36 a.m. 5.CORRESPONDENCE A letter from the Grand Erie DSB to President of OPSBA regarding trustee remuneration will be included in the trustee information packages. The following correspondence was added to the May 11 Board agenda under "Communications": •Corporation of the Township of Norwich regarding retaining Otterville PS, North Norwich PS and Norwich PS; • Oxford County Council regarding support of the Township of Norwich's resolution to retain Otterville PS,North Norwich PS and Norwich PS; •Ontario Student Trustees'Association (OSTA-AECO) re:requesting fees. 6.APPOINTMENT TO POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE Chair Roberts indicated that it will be necessary to seek a replacement for Trustee Jaffe on the Policy Working Committee following his resignation from the Committee.Interested candidates will be sought in order that a motion can be brought before the Board at the 2010 May25 Board meeting. 7.TESI ACTION PLAN The next steps inthe TESI team building Initiative were discussed.Exec. Supt.M.Sereda and Supt.L.Griffith-Jones will be asked to attend the 2010 May 11 PD Committee meeting to discuss the next steps. 8.SEX EDUCATION CURRICULUM The Ministry's new sex education curriculum was discussed.Exec.Supt.L.Elliott will be asked to provide an update to the Board at the 2010 May 25 Board meeting. 2010 May 11...35 16.REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -cont'd f.REPORT OF THE CHAIRS'COMMITTEE -cont'd 9.Ontario Student Trustees'Association (OSTA)IVIEMBERSHIP FEES Tlie request for fees from OSTA was discussed.Director Tucl<er will send a letter to the Association advising of the Board's ongoing concerns.He will provide an update at the 2010 May 11 Board meeting. The following motion was moved and carried; That the Board approve the Director of Education sending a letter to OSTA-AECO outlining the Boards'concerns about the lack ofa reconciled revenue and expenditures report and the lack of parental and/or Board supervision of students attending OSTA-sponsored events. 10.OTHER BUSINESS-none 11.DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING The following meetings were scheduled for 9:00 a.m.: • May 19; •June 2, 16. 12.ADJOURNMENT-The meeting adjourned at 11:06 a.m.by motion. It was noted that letters to OSTA-AECO have been sent inthe past two years requesting a reconciled revenue and expenditure report and for more parental and/or Board supervision at student events. A response has not been received to any of the correspondence. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the Director of Education sending a letter to OSTA-AECO outlining the Boards'concerns regarding the lack ofa reconciled revenue and expenditures report and the lack of parental and/or Board supervision of students attending OSTA-AECO sponsored events. The recommendation was approved on motion by R.Tisdale,seconded byJ.Stewart. T.ROBERTS Chairperson g.REPORT OF THE COMMITTEEOF THE WHOLE -IN CAMERA 2010 May 11 MEMBERS PRESENT ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS J.Bennett (Chair)J.Kamphuis B.Tucker M.Moynihan K.Dalton V.Nielsen S.Doub S.Peters B.Greene ME Smith F.Exiey S.Polhill L Elliott B.Sonier T.Grant T.Roberts M.Sereda P.Tufts G.Hart P.Sattler C.Bourbonnais-MacDonald K.Bushell W.Huff J.Stewart K.Edgar S.Christie P.Jaffe R.Tisdale L.Griffith-Jones D.Rajala S.Hughes K.Young Regrets:C.Neville The Committee met in camera from 6:00 p.m.to 6:35 p.m. 2010 May 11...36 16.REPORTS OF COIUIIUIITTEES -cont'd g.REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - IN CAMERA -cont'd 1.APPROVALOF AGENDA-The agenda was approved by motion. 2.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST -No conflicts of interest were declared. 3.Confidential property and personal matters were discussed. 4.RISE AND REPORT A motion to rise and report was moved and carried at 6:35 p.m. RECOMMENDATION: That the motions related to surplus property and a resignation to retirement by mutual consent be approved. The recommendation was approved on motion by J. Bennett,seconded byJ. Stewart. JOYCE BENNETT Chairperson 16.COMMUNICATIONS a. ONTARIOPUBLIC SCHOOL BOARDS' ASSOCIATION (OPSBA)- UPDATE Trustee Sattler advised that OPSBA's Board of Directors approved a constitutional change in its internal structure from two Vice Presidents to a First and Second Vice President and if the f amendment is adopted at the AGM,that change would take effect immediately. Itwas also explained that OPSBA has set its priorities for the year.These will be announced at the AGM In Windsor. b.CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF NORWICH RE OTTERVILLE,NORTH NORWICH AND NORWICH PUBLIC SCHOOLS A letter was received from the Corporation of the Township of Norwich noting its desire for the continued presence of Otterville, North Non/vich and Norwich Public Schools. 0.OXFORD COUNTY COUNCIL RE OTTERVILLE,NORTH NORWICH AND NORWICH PUBLIC SCHOOLS A letter was received from Oxford County supporting the continued presence of Otterville, North Norwich and Norwich Public Schools. d.ONTARIO STUDENT TRUSTEES ASSOCIATION OSTA-AECO A letter was received from OSTA-AECO requesting OSTA-AECO fees. 17.NOTICE OF MOTION -none 18.MOTION -NOTICE OF WHICH HAS BEEN GIVEN -none 19.ADDITIONAL ITEMS -none f V. 2010 May 11 ...37 20.QUESTIONS/COMMENTS BY MEMBERS Trustee Jaffesuggested thatthe Chairs'Committee review the merits of having mattersthatshouldbe brought before an Accommodation Review Committee ratherthan being brought tothe Board as public input Trustee Bennett noted that the Board Bylawsshould be reviewed and clarifiedinthis matter. Trustee Polhill reminded trusteesofthe Elisabeth Steel Ruerink Memorial Run on 2010 May 30. Trustee Bennett provided trustees with information regarding the Children's Safety Village eventon 2010 June 6. 21.ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m.on motion ofT.Stewart,seconded byF.Exiey. Confirmed: Chairperson 2010 May 11...38 SUMMARY OF APPROVED RECOMMENDATIONS OF 2010 MAY 11 Thatan enrolment cap be Instituted at Jeanne Sauv6 French Immersion Public School attheGrade1 level suchthatnomorethan five grade1 classes will be createdand all five classes meetthe provincial Primary Class Size cap regulations. Thatan enrolment cap be instituted at Jeanne Sauv6 French Immersion Public School such that only one Grade 7 Extended French Program class witha cap of 34 students be offered. Thatan enrolment cap be instituted at Jeanne Sauv6 French Immersion Public School such that only one Grade 8 Extended French Program class with a cap of35 students be offered. That the Attendance Support Program policybe approved. That the Attendance Areas for Students policy and procedure be referred back to Administration. Thatthe Boardapprovethe Director of Education sending a letterto OSTA-AECO outlining the Boards' concerns regardingthe lackofa reconciled revenue and expenditures reportand the lackof parental and/or Board supervision of students attending OSTA-AECO sponsored events. That the motions related to surplus property and a resignation to retirement by mutual consent be approved.