Catholic board rejects more public meetings

Trustees vote 4-3 to turn down motion to curb private discussions

Edmonton Catholic school trustees have been making decisions behind closed doors that should have been public, one board member says.

Trustee Cindy Olsen, who represents northeast Edmonton on the board, said her colleagues have made decisions about money and policy in private meetings, and that those decisions have never been approved in public.

“I just feel strongly as an elected official, we should be transparent and accountable to our public. And, when we’re not, we are at risk of not following through with our expressed responsibility to the public,” Olsen said in a Monday interview.

She declined to say what the decisions were, because the meetings were confidential and she didn’t want to “speak out of turn.”

At Tuesday’s board meeting, Olsen made a motion to conduct all school board business in public, except critical audit and finance decisions.

Trustees voted down the motion 4-3, with Olsen, Debbie Engel and Laura Thibert in favour, and Patricia Grell, Larry Kowalczyk, Marilyn Bergstra and John Acheson opposed.

The School Act compels school boards to conduct meetings in public unless a majority votes in favour of a private meeting. There are exceptions for sensitive matters — often summarized as land, labour and legal issues.

The Catholic school board held public meetings once or twice a month during the 2015-16 school year. In June alone, the board had six closed meetings within 14 working days, Olsen said.

Board chairwoman Bergstra said the board was discussing a personnel issue, which must happen in private.

When questioned after the meeting, Bergstra said any financial decisions made behind closed doors are posted publicly online in the board’s budget and include no unplanned expenses.

The board also made decisions about protocols at private meetings — deciding how trustees should be introduced at events, for example. Bergstra said she’ll show those to anyone who asks.

Committee meetings attended by all board members are a good way for trustees to get all the information they need to make decisions without time limits imposed in public meetings, Bergstra said.

“There are a lot of things we talk about that just wouldn’t be of interest to the public. And I think we’re giving the public the perception ... that there’s something sinister. There isn’t,” Bergstra said.

Acheson agreed, saying the public forum is “a major inhibitor to that form of open discussion.” He doesn’t want to rush decisionmaking, he said.

Engel, who supported the increased transparency motion, said she liked the idea of having more frequent meetings in public. If people are bored, they can leave, she said.

Kowalczyk said longer meetings would be unfeasible. Tuesday’s public meeting was about 31/2 hours long.

Trustees did not agree on whether the business discussed in their non-public committee meetings was private and confidential. Bergstra said those rules need a closer look.