Redirect Inclusive Education Funding to Classrooms
Motion 10 · Special Board Meeting, April 20, 2026
Summary
- Sought to redirect any inclusive education funding being used for principal and vice principal salaries to direct classroom support, and to require that any future increases in inclusive education funding from the ministry go directly to classroom support.
- Context: a prior budget breakdown showed over $2.5 million in inclusive education funds allocated to principal and vice principal salaries.
- Staff clarified that elementary vice principals often hold teaching qualifications and use a portion of their time to provide resource support to students with diverse needs; this arrangement is currently funded through inclusive education dollars.
- A key consequence identified: redirecting these funds would cause the district to lose approximately $2.2 million in provincial classroom enhancement fund dollars, because the district would no longer meet the conditions for that grant.
- Supporters argued for a principled approach ensuring all inclusive education dollars reach the classroom rather than
Vote
Public comments
Read all 2 statements
Transcript
23 segments
Is there a seconder? Prasima, please motivate your motion.
Thanks. I'll just start with that. Whereas inclusive education funding in the past has been used to pay salaries of principals and vice principals and can be redirected by the board for direct classroom support, We heard from delegations that there are inconsistencies and questions about, although increasing the number of SSAs, there are still inconsistencies in whether or not that's actually increasing the quality of education for kids, given that the deployment of the SSAs can have impacts on students' learning when it isn't consistent. I think the intention here is to make sure that any funds and all funds accepted for inclusive education are going to those kids in the classrooms and that we continue to direct that in our budget as a board. Thank you.
Okay, are there any comments or questions? I see Trustee Ma and then Trustee Chen.
Just a question of clarification to the mover. Trustee Reddy, are you talking about school-based principals and vice principals?
Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Trustee Reddy, to propose this motion. I just want to get a clarification. So right now we are moving, I do see on the notes saying that because over staffing ratio, we will have less 2.2 million funding from the minister.
Kate, that's a question for the secretary treasurer.
Sure, please go ahead. Thank you. So currently we receive funding from the ministry of education and childcare under the classroom enhancement fund to allow for teacher staffing to be added over and above operating supported resource teachers. And that funding, if this motion was to pass, will no longer be provided because the district will utilize operating funding to fund those positions instead of accessing the classroom enhancement fund that funding that is provided by the minister of education in order to meet collective agreement requirements with respect to non-enrolling ratios.
Thank you. Any follow-up on that? Okay. We'll go to trustee Frico.
Okay. Couple of questions, sorry. I'm trying to understand this motion. So my question is to the mover. How do you think we're gonna allocate the money from the principal and vice principals to the classroom? And my second question is, if this motion passed, as it mentioned, we're losing $2.2 million, the funding that we're getting. So just trying to understand the intent of this motion. Thank you.
Trustee Reddy, please go ahead.
Yeah, thanks, Trustee Freedcoat. So my understanding from the last budget process where we did receive the breakdown of how inclusive education dollars were being spent is that there was over $3 million going to principals and vice principals, although we didn't get that same table. In this budget process, my intention here is to make sure that the board is directing all dollars to the classroom and not... to the principals and vice principals as we've seen in previous years. So that's where it's coming from with the sort of limited information we have at this point, not having that exact table that we had in previous years that showed a higher percentage going to principals and vice principals upwards of 3 million away from the classroom support. So that would be my response to how to allocate. In terms of the loss of the 2.2 million, I can't speak to that. I think that's more of what the Secretary-Treasurer commented on. Thank you.
Secretary-Treasurer, would you please comment on what you just heard? And provide the page number if possible.
So the information that you're referring to, Trustee Reddy, was provided to the board as part of the package that was circulated on April 7th. It is part of the bylaw. It is Schedule 2C and it's page eight of Schedule 2C. So that's where the information is available with the specific breakdown of expenses for function 110, inclusive education. Thank you very much.
Are there additional questions from trustees? We'll go to Trustee Fraser.
I'm curious, you know, looking at the... table and that the information provided on the costs, it's about two and a half million dollars on principal and vice principal salaries for inclusive education. I'm curious about what is the work that the VPs do?
Is that for Alison Ogden? I believe so. Thank you.
Through the chair, I believe that's teaching time that our vice principals have at elementary school where they provide direct resource support to students. So that's teaching time of vice principals for resource.
Okay, thank you. We have a follow-up from Trustee Fraser.
So, and...
So my understanding is VPs in elementary schools are typically, or are they always a full-time position? And there's some of their time allocated to being a VP and some time allocated to teaching. If we were to, it seems as though from the information provided on the funding, if we were to take away their resource, if we were to reallocate the resource time, then what we would do, we'd have the VPs as enrolling teachers. And would that be to maintain a VP in that position full-time?
Through the chair, I can answer that. Yes. Those elementary vice principals would pick up teaching time and that resource time would be allocated to resource teachers.
Trustee Richardson, is that a hand?
So the, through the chair to, to, Assistant Superintendent Ogden. I'm still confused. So we now have, and I understood that on a K are based upon the school needs, a vice principal or principal would provide students to students with disabilities or diverse abilities.
So in passing this motion, it is how it will impact in a school setting, the support for those students in need.
Statement Watch
Thank you very much, Chair. And I'm going to pass it over to Patricia McNeil, Director, to give you an update on the engagement. Thank you. Thank you. The engagement summary report included in this evening's package and posted to our website outlines input we received to assist in the board's consideration of the 2026-2027 financial plan. Engagement activities were grounded in our education plan, the framework for enhancing student learning, and follow best practice standards by the International Association of Public Participation, or IAB2. Input was sought from inherent rights holders, stakeholder groups, students, families, staff, and the broader public through a mix of methods and activities. The engagement period was open from January 12th to April 16th and included multiple opportunities such as meetings, workshops, and discussions with inherent rights holders and former stakeholder groups, as well as written submissions to the board, an online survey, which was available publicly and to staff, as well as students, and last week's Committee of the Whole meeting and public delegation meeting. Trustees received a copy of all written submissions on a weekly basis, as well as a copy of survey responses in early March. An interim summary report was available that first week of March as well. The report in your package this evening is an update to that interim report to include information about input and feedback received since early March. Across engagement activities, participants highlighted priorities related to classroom staffing and supports, a focus on student learning and course offerings, as well as schedules, learning resources, student wellbeing and mental health, inclusion and equity, facilities and school or learning environments, as well as supports to student families. It's important to note that priorities raised through this year's engagement reflect patterns that we've heard through previous year's financial planning, and I would be pleased to take any questions trustees may have.
Statement Watch
ELLIE WILSON- Thanks for the question through the chair. Our resource teachers in schools provide a variety of services. I think sort of to your question, they're responding to every student's individual education plan, and those vary across the needs of all students. So there would be small group work, there's push-in support that happen in classrooms, and it's all directed by a student's individual education plan. So those folks coming into our schools would need to familiarize themselves with those individual education plans and get up to speed about how to implement that. Certainly our school-based resource teachers could leave weekly, I would say, detailed plans about how they're working with students, but those would be constantly evolving plans. And I think... A lot of our folks who are sick for a day or two don't necessarily have those very detailed, detailed plans that would provide guidance to somebody. Certainly someone who's gonna be away could prepare that to support the work.
Do you have a follow-up? Go ahead.
Thank you. So if a teacher is absent, a resource teacher is absent and there is a TTOC in place for that, they won't have the full information of those particular cases for those students. Is that correct?
Through the chair, that is correct. They would have to take a bit of time to learn how to do that.