If the termination of the Board in these circumstances is allowed to stand, the consequences are significant for every school district and democratically-elected Board of Education in the Province. This is a power-grab by the Minister, and the former Trustees say it is not one the law permits. /7

At issue in the JR is: whether the gov’t had jurisdiction and authority to dismiss a democratically elected BOE over this issue, and to force a Board to adopt unwanted local policy against its wishes, or whether those are squarely the type of decisions that the legislation asks the Board to make. /6

However, the court is not being asked to determine whether an SPLO Program is warranted, or what form it should take. 5/

The former members of the Board stand behind the appropriateness of their decision that if a School Police Liaison Program is part of Victoria schools, it should be based on empirical evidence of a need for it and subject to some basic oversight by the Board, like any other program in schools. /4

The Minister of Education and Child Care says the Board’s termination had nothing to do with a disagreement over whether to reintroduce a School Police Liaison Program that the Victoria Police walked away from in 2018. The Board contends the record plainly shows that it was. /3

The 9 former members of the Greater Victoria School Board have filed an application to the B.C. Supreme Court to challenge the unprecedented decision by Cabinet on Jan. 30, 2025 to terminate them – the democratically-elected members of a statutory body – over a disagreement about school policy. /2

Each district has different styles of programs. Not all have PLOs. SD61 was the only district required to have a stand alone safety plan. I think the new Vancouver PLO program with robust accountability, oversight & a complaint process would have been a good model for Victoria.

I am a (former) parent in SD61. What the BOE was asking for is accountability and spelled out rights & responsibilities. But the police depts. refused to consider what seems to me to be reasonable requests.

The minister is given the authority to fire the Board via the School Act but the Act says nothing about police or SPLOs.

I’ve read the special advisor’s report. He cited failures of governance because: 1) The Board did not ask questions after a meeting 2) The chair gave the super an @unrealistic” deadline to update a document 3) The Board did not “engage” enough with the community. 🤷🏻‍♀️