Rob Paynter

I view the role of the trustee to be one of public service. In this capacity, I have attempted to serve as an information source to people who are seeking information or assistance; my understanding of district administration and Board policy as well as my access to staff enables me to provide answers and connect parents and others to staff members who are best equipped to address their interests. At the board table, I make use of the input I receive from the public, in combination with my understanding of policy and legislation and my personal skills and experience, to make decisions that reflect the best interests of our students and the long-term effectiveness of district resources.

I am the parents of two, one who recently graduated from SD 61 and another who will soon graduate. I’ve been involved in school related activities through PACs and as a member of the board since my children were in elementary school – about 11 years now.

I first ran for this position after my partner and I struggled to resolve a serious matter where our child was repeatedly and often violently assaulted by a classmate. While the teacher did everything in their power to create a safe environment, school and district administration refused to initially act. After the situation was finally resolved, my partner and I considered how much privilege we had relied upon to protect our child. I ran for the position because we couldn’t stop thinking about the outcomes for all the kids whose families didn’t have those same privileges. 

I believe that the next Board will have an enormous amount of work to do to repair the harm done to relationships with the Four Houses over the past term. The next Board will have to take deliberate action to talk, listen and identify opportunities to collaboratively address the many challenges that Indigenous students face in our schools.

I know that we have incredible staff who are already working full out to support Indigenous students. The recent Metis Nation of BC Local Education Agreement is just one example of the results of those efforts. I believe that by diligently working to repair and reinforce relationships with the leadership and communities represented by the Four Houses, the Board can better understand the work already underway and support future efforts to make more improvements.

I don’t accept exclusion in any form. I understand that there are reasons why it might occur but that doesn’t mean any of it should ever be tolerated. When considering disabilities, I believe that much of the challenges result from decisions made beyond the authority of the School Board, whether in the form of provincial budget allocations, or in policies regarding designations for assistance. I believe that by creating a positive environment for all students and meeting the needs of those with physical disabilities and learning challenges, the end result will be a more positive and effective learning environment for everyone.

Regarding exclusions based on race, culture, language, sexual orientation, and gender identity, I believe that each of us deserves to live freely as our authentic selves. My proposal to review the Police Liaison Officer program was driven by a concern that racialized, LGBTQ and other students had expressed concerns about the impact of the program in our schools. I believe that there is much that can be gained from learning from examining our own potential blind spots and systemic practices.

Health and sexual education must be a thoughtful and fully supported component of our educational practices- with the topic addressed sensitively and appropriately at multiple points throughout each student’s educational journey. Earlier this year, I witnessed a local protest conducted by students concerned about sexual violence and the need for consent in healthy relationships. I will eagerly press our Superintendent to provide the resources necessary to achieve this objective.

While I am confident in our staff to respond to these challenges, I believe that the Board has an important role to play in demonstrating leadership. At times there may be a desire to minimize or ignore issues because of personal discomfort or fear of reputational harm as an organization but I believe that only by addressing such matters head on can we demonstrate the integrity the community deserves to see in their public education system. Finally, I am also very aware that as a privileged, white, middle class, middle aged, straight, university educated, professionally employed male, I have so much to learn and unlearn on the broader matter of exclusion. I will look to those who better understand specific issues as I work to learn and make informed decisions as I grow.

I have been involved in effective engagement sessions both at formal meetings and during casual conversations over coffee. In each situation, the same basic elements were present – mutual respect, a willingness to sincerely listen to each other’s perspectives, a desire to share and discuss ideas openly and honestly without reservation, and a commitment to achieving the best possible outcome for everyone.

I believe the district should consult more about all sorts of things, for example, extending the annual satisfaction survey to every student and parent instead of just a few grades and undertaking quick informal surveys to determine how students, caregivers and staff might feel about a topic to determine if there is even an appetite for further consideration. We should institute formal exit surveys for graduating students (perhaps at elementary and middle levels as well) as well as for every employee. Increasing engagement benefits our decision making and will also make us more inquisitive as we learn that input from many sources can reveal new ideas and possible solutions that weren’t initially considered.

I believe that we need to lengthen our consultation processes significantly to provide space for greater engagement. I believe the first step in any consultation process is to engage with rightsholders and stakeholders, identify our general intentions and seek feedback on whether we have identified the key issues involved as well as determine how, and to what extent, different parties wish to be engaged. We need to be explicit about the questions we ask and what we expect to learn from them. I can think of examples where people (myself included) were surprised by the inferences that were drawn and used from surveys that no one understood would be used for a later purpose. This sort of challenge erodes confidence and is the very opposite of collaborative decision making.

Engagement sessions that are limited to delivering information out with inadequate time for participants to respond are not consultation, nor are sessions where necessary information is only provided at the start and participants don’t have the time to absorb what they have received. Schedules must also consider the time it takes for representative bodies to effectively engage with their stakeholders/membership and report back. The people in a room frequently lack the authority to respond directly to what is being discussed. There also needs to be an acknowledgement that in a community as broad and knowledgeable as Greater Victoria, there will be people participating who understand aspects of the issue far better than those organizing the consultation. This is not a limitation; its an opportunity to be embraced.

Over the past several years, I have witnessed student services being transformed and in some cases eliminated, without a clear understanding of what improvements were intended or have resulted. I will be looking for very clear, specific answers. I recognize that in a dynamic system based on human interactions, not every important consideration can be tracked using SMART goals, but it is surprising how many can.

I am concerned with the state of trust between the Board and rightsholders/stakeholders. Some of the issues that eroded these relationships are well understood but all need to be explored, considered, and solutions developed collaboratively so that all involved have confidence in the Board’s governance capacity.

From an educational standpoint, the district continues to struggle to be a top performer in terms of academic outcomes in the province, despite its many positive attributes. We have excellent teaching staff, numerous resources and partners in the community, and access to many opportunities that can contribute to a wonderful educational experience. I believe we should dig deep into our own data to identify what specifically is holding us back, then look at the examples set by districts that may be more effective than ourselves in an effort to develop specific strategies to help us improve

Deficits are a bit of an artificial construct of the budget process. They are not debt; instead, they reflect a desire to spend more funding than we anticipate receiving and should be recognised as a decision point for the Board. I am challenged by the language surrounding deficits because it inherently implies a cause for concern and imposes a potentially urgent need/willingness to accept trade-offs that might not otherwise be acceptable. Deficits are formed through an underestimation of student numbers and an overestimation of expenses. Given that school districts must not run deficit budgets, it is prudent to leave some room for the unexpected. The amount of conservativism however has created significant problems for our district in past years. I believe that trustees must bring a strong analytical eye to this balance and make decisions that prioritize student needs at the centre.

With respect to the arts (including music), these, in my opinion, are every bit as core as math and science. Music supports brain development, collaboration, supports math skills and may well give kids a reason to show up for school each day. I believe that funding the elementary strings program for many years did not create a budgetary crisis; that issue was directly a result of attempts to shift funding under the guise of deficit management. I do believe that there are matters of equity of access that should be addressed to ensure that opportunities are available to all students. The district has an important role to play in addressing the collaborative design of music programming so that we can build manageable and flexible job postings that will encourage more teachers to apply for these positions.

I have given this matter considerable thought in recent months. I believe at its core has been a general disagreement among trustees and between some trustees and district administration regarding the role of trustees. In my opinion, one school of thought envisions trustees as the board of a publicly traded company, installed primarily to safeguard the interests of shareholders and only stepping in when actions of administration threatens profitability. At the other end is a board of elected representatives who see themselves as the leaders of a community-focused institution that owes its duty of care first and foremost to students and then second to the broader community. I see myself primarily representing the second perspective.

Over the past term, the tension between these two viewpoints has resulted in considerable tension among trustees, and between trustees and senior administration who may view hard questions and amendments to their proposals as challenges to their authority. It is my personal view that the initial investigation into trustee misconduct following the 2019 catchment boundary review was a thinly veiled attempt to exert pressure on trustees to conform to administration’s direction. For example, I was investigated for undermining staff by acknowledging concerns about the then draft boundary proposal at a PAC meeting and encouraging parents to participate in the district-led stakeholder engagement process. Another trustee was challenged for asking difficult questions during a school visit.

I believe that at the core of any successful working relationship is mutual respect and an open sharing of information. On numerous occasions during this past term, I discovered what I considered to be critical information to a pending decision either by chance at the last moment or after the fact. Examples of this include the impact of development on the planned Vic High track and field project, cost overruns related to the Burnside remediation project and the claw back of district funding for Reading Recovery in schools – a key early intervention program for struggling readers.

I believe that a new Board will be able to avoid many of these challenges by clearly articulating its expectations regarding the relationship between trustees and senior administration at the start of the term. The Board will benefit from mechanisms that it does not now make use of, for example, the ability to call a recess and move into in camera setting to discuss concerns regarding conduct without running the risk of harm to individual reputations. I believe that the adoption of other administrative procedures can do much to address potential issues related to information sharing and consideration of multiple approaches to resolving differing issues.