Grand Erie trustee barred from meetings wins court approval to get back to work

Barred Grand Erie District School Board (GEDSB) trustee Carol Ann Sloat received welcome news from the Superior Court of Justice last week — she’s free to return to school board committee meetings while she awaits her judicial review in October.

Sloat and the GEDSB have been embroiled in a largely private battle going back to at least May 2023, when a board-imposed ban barred Sloat from attending board meetings — for reasons neither Sloat nor the board has explicitly explained in public.

The ban was extended several times stretching until the end of May 2024 and was expanded to block her from virtually watching meetings, which all members of the public are permitted to do.

It was a hard blow for the trustee, who said she hadn’t missed a meeting since first getting elected to represent Brantford on the board in 2003.

Additional sanctions prevented Sloat from participating in the policy program, joint advisory and student committees she sits on until the end of May 2025.

The committee level is where “the most important work for the board occurs” and barring her from them “effectively removes me from any meaningful work as a trustee,” court heard at an April 24 hearing on whether to stay the sanctions.

Her lawyer, Jordan Lester, requested a suspension of the sanctions on the argument that “the very sanctions she’s challenging” will have been served before her case is heard in October.

“What is the point of seeking judicial review if the applicant is punished regardless?” Lester posed to Justice Michael Gibson.

The board’s council, Mark Zega, maintained GEDSB followed a “procedurally fair process” in line with the Education Act, acting in a reasonable manner with sufficient reasoning in a way that did not violate Sloat’s Charter rights.

Gibson, of the Superior Court of Justice in Hamilton, sided with Sloat, suspending her board-imposed sanctions until the judicial review she requested is heard at the Divisional Court in October.

Tensions over meetings in camera

Sloat went public about what she had been dealing with in a February 2024 social-media post.

“Recently, things have become very hostile at our board,” with the increasing use of in camera meetings, meaning “that you, the public (whose taxes funds the school board), are not allowed to know what’s being discussed,” Sloat wrote.

“I strongly objected to what I believed to be the overuse of this process. I believe that our discussions should not be hidden from the public, without very good reason,” and while Sloat said she tried to resolve disagreements internally and with diplomacy “things took a troubling turn,” her post continued.

“There are a group of trustees and members of the senior administration team who resent the fact that I have challenged them in my defending your right to know,” she wrote in her post, before asking constituents whether she should step down from her role or continue to fight the board.

The GEDSB released a statement the following day calling Sloat’s post “regrettable and misleading.”

“All trustees have statutory duties that must be fulfilled, and the board has established a code of conduct that governs the conduct of all its trustees. These rules ensure the orderly operation and work of a student-focused school board. The statutory obligations and rules apply equally to us all, we can’t choose which to follow or ignore and, through the oath of office, we promise to uphold them. As a board, we need to set this example for staff and students,” the statement read in part.

It went on to say, “Regrettably, trustee Sloat has repeatedly violated those rules. In each case, the board, as authorized by the Education Act, found her to be in violation of the code of conduct, resulting in her being barred from board and committee meetings for a period of time. Trustee Sloat, through her own deliberate actions, has received sanctions, which are authorized under the Education Act, to address the behaviour.”

In May 2023 and again in December 2023, the board determined Sloat violated the code of conduct.

They said she failed to keep information from in camera meetings confidential, failed to fulfil her duties set out in section 218.1 of the Education Act and “did not base her actions on unimpeachable conduct.”

Specifics haven’t been provided to the public — the board said they’re waiting until the judicial review is complete before issuing a public censure.

However, the sections of the code they said she violated relate to respecting the views of others, keeping information discussed in closed session meetings confidential, and a responsibility to uphold majority decisions passed by the board and acting for the best interest of the GEDSB.

‘Where’s the money coming from for the board to pay for all this?’

In a call Wednesday morning, Sloat told The Spectator: “I’m looking forward to getting back and supporting the parents and the taxpayers that put me in the role. I was elected for a reason and they’ve missed out on my point of view at the board table.”

No further committee meetings are scheduled this school year, but Sloat will be eligible to return in September and can attend the remaining board meeting on June 24.

But while this may bring some relief, Sloat said she’s worried about “what isn’t getting done” as a result of the “huge cost to the board” to fight her.

“I know how much it’s costing my family personally,” to fund her sole lawyer. At the hearing to stay the sanctions, the board had two lawyers plus a legal assistant, she said.

“Where’s the money coming from for the board to pay for all this?” she wondered.

The Spectator asked GEDSB if any programs or initiatives have taken a cut because of this.

Also, their thoughts on Gibson’s June 18 verdict, which noted there are “clearly significant issues to be tried in this matter, regarding the process followed by the (school board), the reasonableness of its decisions, it’s jurisdiction, and the proportionality of sanctions imposed.”

The board did not directly answer either question, however, emailed a statement from chair Susan Gibson.

“We are aware of the court’s decision. We are reviewing the matter with legal counsel, and any further comment or decision will be deferred pending this review.”

As for whether the court’s decision has given Sloat a glimmer of hope for the October judicial review, she said, “it’s up to the courts to decide when that happens” and that she’ll have to “be patient” in the meantime.

Celeste Percy-Beauregard’s reporting is funded by the Canadian government through its Local Journalism Initiative. The funding allows her to report on stories about Brant County. Reach her at cpercybeauregard@torstar.ca.

Celeste Percy-Beauregard, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, The Hamilton Spectator