HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Lucknow Sentinel, 1982-10-13, Page 2ews
_ einten Sentinel, Wedesday, October 13,. I$2 --Page 2
Director decides how board business will be considered
BY STEPHANIE LEVIEQUE
The director of education for the Huron
Comity Board of Education has been given
the. authority to decide whether items of
board business go to committee or the whole
board first.'
. At its Oct 4 meeting, the board rescinded
a previous motion which had all board
business brought directly to the board, first.
Recently the .board made the change from
having all board business referred to com-
inittee first to having it referred to the
hoard.
"This provides the . opportunity for most
trustees to have as much input as possible, .
:0._ said director of education John Cochrane of
't; the most recent decision.
Trustee Joan Van Den Broeck disagreed.
"I am disappointed with the recommen-
dation. I'll be the first to'concede it is the
most efficient way,, but at a purchase price
of being fully informed," commented Mrs.
Van Den Broeck.
Enrolment up
A province -wide phenomenon;is. also oc-
curring in Huron County. ,
The Huron County Board of Education
learned enrolment at secondary schools in
the county has 'increased by 127 students
over What was anticipated.
Figures presented by the personnel com-
mittee at the board's Oct. 4 meeting show
that enrolment was expected to be 3,843, but
as of Sept. 13 was actually 3,970.
"How come all of a sudden we have higher
enrolment?" queried Trustee Jean Adams
of Goderich.. •
"The' students can't find work and they
find a need for higher education," replied
personnel committee chairman John Elliott
of Blyth: ,
- In response to these increases, one and a
half additional teachers have beenhired at
Central' Huron Secondary School, :Clinton
and one teacher has been hired for Seaforth
District High School for the fust semester.
Director of education Join' Cochrane told
the board that actual enrolment figures
from Sept. 30, figures used for grant pur-
poses, have not yet been .finalized and will
be, presented to the, board at a future
meeting-.
Hold honorariums
Huron County. Board of Education
trustees will receive $400 a month for the
next three years.
At its Oct. 4 meting,ethe board decided to
keep the honorarium at the rate set back in
February of this year.
The executive committee unanimously
approved recommendingto the board that
the trustee stipend remain at the $400 level
with the chairman receiving $600 a month.
In discussing the recommendation the ex-
ecutive committee considered comments •
made by trustees at the board's September
meeting. At that time trustees indicated the
amount should remain at the present level. ,
The board also approved a payment of $25
per meeting and expenses for non -board
members who are appointed to committees.
Director of education John Cochrane said
the board currently has only two 'commit-
tees whicn have non -board members on it.
They are the early school leaving commit-
tee and the special education advisory com=
mittee.
She suggested the committee system be.
abolished and that more board meetingsbe
held,
"We're not such a large board and we'll
have a better public image," said Mrs. Van
Den Broeck:
When asked to clarify lier'statements by •
board chairman Dorothy Wallace, Mrs: Van
Den Broeck stated a perfect example had
been broughtforward earlier in the
meeting. She was referring to a report on
term appointments reviewed by the person-
nel committee. The ` committee concluded
the concept of term appointments not be in-
vestigated further. Mrs, Van Den Broeck re-
quested the ,whole matter be tabled and
copies of the report be presented to the en-
tire board for perusal and discussion at the
November meeting.
"Board members as a whole are not
aware of what's in the report," said Mrs.
Van Den Broeck. ••
Trustee Bert Morin countered that if the
committee system was abolished, the board
would be meeting `.`at least five times a
month".
"That in itself would entail costs, such as
mileage," noted Mr. Morin. "The board has
to trust the committee system. I: think it is
working." '
He added that trustees not on a particular
committee,are not denied information.
"When the county board was established
it met twice a month ... why can't we return.
Surely the workload would not be, more hor
rendous," commented Mrs. Van ' Den
Broeck.
She added that generally committee
meetings don't last long and any business
requiring additional input could be referred
to an ad hog -'committee.
"I don't think the public like it (committee
system) and I don't like it either," said Mrs.
Van Den Broeck. .
Trustee Jean Adams said she likes the
committee system, but was. concerned
aboutboard businesss being routed through
the director. She said it is nothing personal.
against the director.
Mr. Cochranee said board business would
be brought to the board directly or through a
committee,
Trustee John Jewitt also spoke in favor of
the committee system. He noted that some
board members "don't make a lot of noise at
a whole board meeting" but contribute at
the committee'level. •
"Anyway, the committee" doesn't make
the decision, the whole board does and we
have to sell the whole board," said Mr,
• Jewitt.
Mrs. Wallace noted some of Mrs. Van Den
Broeck's concern may have arisen because
presentations made by the staff to the
education committee.- are not heard by the ' ..
whole board.
Trustees Clarence McDonald and Murray
Mulvey said .they had both been on the board
when there were two meetings a month and
the concept didn't work. Mr. McDonald said
two meetings a month is fine, but trustees
found themselves sitting on three of four. ad
hoc committees at the same time. Mr.
Mulvey said two meetings a month is.more
work for. the superintendents.
Dr. John Goddard asked if he could speak
at a committee meeting of which he was not
a member. He was told he could not vote,
but yes, he could speak.
"I can't see a problem, if an individual
board member has a concern, they can go to
a meeting and. express that concern." said
Dr. Goddard.
"Madame chairman, I am not concerned
about that, but, that we as trustees are bet-
ter informed. It's the best way," said Mrs.
Van Den Broeck.
•
Trustee John Elliott said 'trustees do have
the opportunity to attend any committee
meeting except,for the negotiating commit-
tee meetings.
"You receive a notice of every meeting,"
stated Mr. Elliott.
"Trustees don't . all take ' advantage of
that," noted Mrs. Van Den Broeck.
"You can only speak for yourself,"
countered Mr. Elliott.
Mrs. Van Den Broeck acknowledged that
the present system is "extremely efficient"
but the best interests of the public should be
considered.
"I'm not saying I'm right, . but I feel
strongly about it,'' concluded Mrs. Van Den
Broeck.
U1'F7toldth depend on assistance...
•from page 1.
The second option Which is open to
homeowners is to take the legal route
through the FRESH organization. FRESH
which stands for Foam Removal for En-
vironmentally Safe Housing; is an incor-
porated groin which was organized for the
purpose of : suing the government.' The
lawsuits are for restitution for the devalua-
tion f the homeowner's property, not for
sickness or money loss incurred because of
the presence of foam in a.home.
According to Mr. Smee the third option
which is available . to homeowners. "is to
take all that you can get from the govern-
ment and then still'sue them."'
If a person has taken such action Smee
says, "a homeowner does not prejudice his
right to sue the government by accepting
money through the UFFI program."
Mr. Smee said, "In other words if you ac-
cept all; the money you get .from the UFFI.
Centre ' and if youstill find that you have
bills in excess of that, which warrant taking
legal action, you could sue the government
for the balance of the funds." •
However, Mr. Smee warned the audience
° that the governmentntaintains the position
that it is not guilty, nor liable, forthe,
damages done to the houses that have had
UFFI installed and will hire a. lawyer to
fight its case.
If the "government is takene to court Mr.
Smee says the government "will argue that
they acted responsibly when they authoriz-
ed the use of foam and that they . further
acted responsibly when they placed the ban
upon the product."
• Mr. Smee added that he ` has been told
from certain sources that it could take from
sso�ux to ten years until you get a court settle-
nt.
After pointing \out the three options, Mr.
Smee told the audience that there were cer-
tain details which the homeowner should be \
aware of. •
According to Mr. Smee the Advisory
Council has been able to convince the
Ministry to provide a foam removal course
free of charge to 'homeowners. If the
homeowner passes the course with a mark
of !0 per cent or higher, the person is entitl-
ed to do his or her own removal and may
supervise : other homeowner's foam
removal.
Mr. Smee also told the audience that once
the assistance program has been approved,
there will be a two week promotion .period
and then proclamation of the program.
According to Mr. Sinee, "all work on foam
removal that has started before proclama-
tion does not have to be done in accordance
with the regulations and it will not affect en-
titlement for assistance money "
• Finally, Mr. Smee urged the homeowners
to check their tax assessment forms and if a
reduction in taxes has not been applied, the.
homeowner should find out why. If there has
been no reduction, the homeowner has until.
January 12,1983 to enter an appeal.
He says in most appealed cases there has
been a 75 per cent reduction in taxes. He ad-
ded that "the assessment will remain reduc-
ed until there have been some changes
made in the home, therefore, there is no
need to appeal each year."
WMC completes phase one of waste :study...
*from page 1
annual production of special waste is in
liquid form. To reduce the quantity hauled to
a treatment facility. particularly if it is part
of 'a centralized system,, regional transfer
and dewatering stations would be desirable.
Based on the geographical distribution • of
generated wastes, these collection areas
could include Kingston/Ottawa, WFndsor/ -
Trustees seek re-election
Thirteen of the 16 trustees on the Huron
County Board of Education will be seeking
re-election in the November 8 municipal'
election.
Chairman Dorothy Wallace asked trustees
at the October 4 meeting to declare their
intentions. '
Those who will definitely be running are:
John :Elliott, representing the townships of
East Wawanosh and Morris and Blyth;
Frank Falconer, representing. Tuckersmith
Township and Clinton; ,Eugene Frayne,
representing separate school supporters; H.
Hayter, representing Exeter and the town-
ships of Stephen and Usborne; John Jewitt,
who represents Seaforth and the townships
of Hallett and McKillop; Clarence McDonald
representing the townships of Usborae and
Stephen and Exeter; Dave McDonald, repre-
senting Brussels and. Grey Township: Bert
Morin. representing Wingha!n, . the sawn-
ships of Howick and Turnberry; R. K. Peck
representing Bayfield and Stanley Town-
ship; Dennis Rau, representing separate
school, supporters; Joan Van Den Broeck,
representing the townships of Colborne and
Goderich; and Dorothy Wallae. represent-
ing Goderich.
Trustee Marian Zinn of Ashfield and West
Wawanosh Townships was absent from the
meeting but has indicated in' letters to the
editor of the Lv.cknow Sentinel and the
Goderich. Signal -Star that she does not
intend to seek re-election to the board.
Also absent were Dave MacDonald and
Dennis Rau, but they had indicated to their
Colleagues they wopld be running again.
Sarnia. London. Saul' Ste: Marie. Thunder
Bay and Sudbury/North Bay.
A fully centralized facility would require
the largest individual site. of any option.
Studies to date suggest it may be difficult to
find an acreage suitable for such a facility on
industrially • zone rr .-Town-owned land
wi hin. preferre i ate=rogeological/geological
regions. More uetaited analysis'is required
of industrial park land and available
industrially zones' land, particularly in the
1 pronto-Hainila m c.rea. to assess the likeli-
:n od of finding , suitable acreage for a fully
centralized' facility near +he centre of the
greatest canceniration of waste generation.
Most of . the treatment technologies
pro;ucc liquid effluents that must be
dispersed by connection to a sewer system or
some other means of proper discharge into
an eligible waste water receiving stream or
body of water. This is one of the most
important siting requirements for treatment
facilities. It is; not yet known whether these
requirements can be met in an area with the
preferred hydrogeological/geological condi-
tions Tor a secure landfill.
Evaluation of key enviroment factors such
as archaeological. land use, climatic and
transportation factors show that their
importance will vary between potential sites.
Specific analysis 'at. a later stage will.
therefore, be essential.
The findings are, contained -in a newslet-
ter. OWMC Exchange, the September issue.
Detailed study reports and the Phase One
Summary 1teport have ' been deposited in
iecations across the province. During the
next several weeks. OWMC staff will be
meeting with groups and individuals wishing
to discuss the Phase One report..
The • next phase of the work, Phase Two of
the Facilities Development Process, is
designed to evaluate the information ob-
tained in the Phase One Report and' will
include with an outline of several specific
facility options; including component type
and general locations. To arrive at these
conclusion's. says Chant. the OWMC needs
the advice and reaction from individuals and
groups across the province on the studies
'that have now been completed. •
individuals and groups wishing to meet
with OWMC or obtain further information on
the Phase One studies, or those seeking to.
present their views, are asked to contact
OWMC either by writing Michael ' Scott,
Director of Communications, Ontario Waste
Management Corporation, 60 Blear Street
West, Suite 707. Toronto, M4W 388, or by
calling the ,Corporation at 1-800-268-1179
and asking to speak to Mr. Scott or to one of
the Communications staff.,