Thread by @munakadri

For the next few hours I will be tweeting updates about the #YRDSB board meeting that is about to start.

You can tune into the meeting here:

yrdsb.civicweb.net/Portal/Meeting…

The meeting is starting with special announcements

The first announcement is about the protests in Ottawa and other places in Canada.

As a board committed to upholding principals of democracy it is important to acknowledge what is happening.

Specifically the board is calling out the acts of antisemitism, Anti-Black racism, homophobia and cultural appropriation.

Images from the protests are unacceptable.

We condemn these actions in the strongest terms. They are making friends and family feel unsafe.

It is imperative we name these acts of hate and discrimination and call them out.

As a school board we stand against hate.

We will work to ensure that our environments are safe, identity affirming and welcoming.

(This is just a summary of what Chair Tam said.)

(Chair Tam was firming and unwavering in condemning the actions of hate on behalf of the board).

Next Trustee Dr. Sinclair recognizes and celebrates Black History Month by highlighting events in YRDSB schools and the broader community.

A recognition now that January is GSA month. There is a GSA in every YRDSB secondary school and in over 50 elementary schools.

Now to the student trustee report.

On Jan 28th they attend OPSBA public education symposium. They also participated in training with Osgoode Hall Law School.

In mid February the Student Trustee Association will be holding events for student trustees.

Recognizing the work of Unionville and PET students for creating an app to help students share information.

Final 4 trustee candidates for next year have been selected.

A debate for the candidates happened.

Campaign videos and profiles are on the student trustee website.

Now to the Director Information Report. It can be found here: yrdsb.civicweb.net/FileStorage/81…

Trustees will be deliberating on an important report tonight. Director is reminding trustees that the decision they will make on the report is important because the responsibility to meet representation by population is outlined in provincial regulations.

The Director is not speaking to her written report otherwise, it can be read at the link 2 tweets back.

Now to the OPSBA report. The education symposium that was held was a big success.

The program supported their multi year strategic priorities.

Nominations are open for the 2022 OPSBA awards, for Education Workers, Teachers, Trustees, etc. Nominations are on the OPSBA website.

They are now discussing the report here: yrdsb.civicweb.net/FileStorage/90…

While discussing this report student trustee Yu asked for private session to discuss a legal matter. Clarification provided that a student trustee can't make that request.

It looks like the issue is the board's policy that student trustees can only run for 1 year terms and can't run again.

I'm not being clear because they are being cryptic.

Trustees have asked if Trustee Yu would be comfortable with sharing the issue publicly, he is not comfortable.

The Director provides clarification that staff are aware of the item Trustee Yu is bringing up. The suggestion is that it goes to the policy committee meeting to discuss the matter.

Trustee Yu asks for it to be formally noted that no trustee supported his request to move into private session because he sees this as a time sensitive.

Student Trustee Yu elaborates that this is time sensitive because it impacts the upcoming student election. The meeting they are referring the discussion to will happen after the student trustee election.

The Director indicates that they can schedule a sooner meeting.

The Director also says staff would like to adhere to the current process, but that a supplementary meeting can be scheduled.

The motion carries to refer.

Now on to the trustee determination recommendations. This is about the redistribution of wards and has been a hotly debated item at multiple meetings.

This motion, moved by Trustee McRoberts seconded by Trustee Dr. Sinclair is now on the floor.

Trustee Cordova asking why the motion is on the floor if the mover is not opening debate.

Now Trustee McRoberts speaking to say that he is moving the motion because it compels them to follow the law.

If they don't pass the motion the Director has to file a non-compliance report with the Minister.

Trustee Cordova speaking in opposition to the motion on the floor because of the way it impacts different "communities of need".

Being advised by the consultants that the status quo can't be sustained on appeal. Meaning if this motion fails, the consultants don't feel like the other motion will be sustained on an appeal outside of the board.

The debate on this issue continues and the same reasons that were presented in past meetings are being brought up again.

Debated has been exhausted, to the vote:

In Favour:

McRoberts
Nathan
Sinclair
Hoeg
Mahmood

Opposed
Tam
Terrell
Cordova
Cui
Liang
Lynn

Abstain
Sherman
Gilbert

The motion fails.

This was just moved by Terrell, seconded by Cordova but Dr. Sinclair is asking for the motion to be ruled out of order.

Dr. Sinclair wants it ruled out of order because she believes it violates the law.

The Chair rules it is not out of order.

Trustee McRoberts challenges the chair and Trustee Nathan seconds.

Trustee McRoberts suggests they take break and call the lawyers who are on standby.

There is now some very vocal disagreement from some trustees about going on a break and moving to private session.

This is the most heated debate I've heard in one of these meetings.

A motion is on the floor to go into private session.

Trustee Cordova asks if there is any new information from legal as they have already met.

Response is that they have to meet with the lawyer to find out.

They have left the public meeting and are in private session to talk to a lawyer for advice.

(I don't know if this has happened before in a meeting.)

They will be back shortly.

It's going to be a long night.

I will start tweeting again when they come back.

My live tweet team wasn’t able to stay up for the meeting.

But they still provide vital moral support.

They are coming back into the main meeting room now.

This is a recap of where we are:

Now to the vote about whether the motion is in order.

In Favour (Motion is in order)
Sherman
Tam
Terrell
Cordova
Cui
Gilbert
Hoeg
Liang
Lynn

Opposed
McRoberts
Nathan
Sinclair
Mahmood

The motion is in order. Now to the debate on the motion.

Moved by Terrell, seconded by Cordova, but it is being amended.

Waiting for the amendment.

The amended motion. What this does is keeps trustee wards status quo right now. Because of uneven population growth in different areas this maintains an imbalance of electors in regions.

The argument for this motion is smaller, more northern communities have unique needs.

One more revision to the wording.

The consultants are indicating that numbers 4 and 5 contradict each other.

Another revision.

Trustees have asked for parliamentary support from staff. The Director has advised that trustees need to pen the motion themselves.

Parliamentary process is not being adhered to & the staff support person has said they can't help because they aren't following what's happening.

Trustee McRoberts speaking against the motion as they have been frequently been advised that this motion would violate the law.

They are now agreeing to recess the meeting shortly and defer this to another meeting.

It looks like they may continue this meeting tomorrow night and pick up this debate and the rest of the agenda tomorrow night.