Article – Since being elected in 2022, Waterloo Region District School Board trustee Natalie Waddell has missed only one meeting. But that single absence now weighs on her mind in a way it never did before.
“If you have a sick child at home or face a personal emergency, you might have to choose between your family and your elected position,” Waddell told me during a phone conversation last week. “That’s not a position any public servant should be forced into.”
The source of her concern? Recent changes to Ontario’s Education Act that mandate automatic removal of trustees who miss three consecutive board meetings without being formally excused by their colleagues. The amendment, quietly passed in April as part of Bill 99, the Working for Workers Three Act, has sent ripples of anxiety through school boards across the province.
At first glance, the rule seems reasonable – elected officials should show up for work. But many trustees and education advocates argue the change undermines local democracy and fails to recognize the part-time, modestly compensated nature of trustee work.
Cathy Abraham, president of the Ontario Public School Boards Association, didn’t mince words when discussing the impact. “These are democratically elected positions. The voters should decide if attendance is adequate, not arbitrary provincial rules,” she explained during our interview at an education conference in Toronto.
For context, most Ontario trustees receive between $5,000 and $29,000 annually, depending on the board size and region. They typically hold evening meetings while maintaining daytime careers, family responsibilities, and community commitments.
The Ministry of Education defends the change as a matter of accountability. In an email statement, Ministry spokesperson Grace Lee wrote: “Students and families deserve representatives who consistently show up. These measures align trustee expectations with municipal councillor requirements.”
But critics point out crucial differences. Municipal councillors typically earn substantially higher compensation – often between $30,000 and $100,000 depending on the municipality – and many serve in full-time capacities with dedicated staff support.
At the Thames Valley District School Board, trustee Corrine Rahman has raised practical concerns about implementation. “The legislation is troublingly vague,” she said during our conversation. “Does a virtual appearance count as attendance? What constitutes a legitimate reason for absence? Who determines what’s acceptable?”
The Ontario government hasn’t provided clear guidelines, leaving interpretation to individual boards. This has created a patchwork of approaches across the province’s 72 school boards.
Some boards, including Toronto District School Board, have moved to create formal absence policies with clear criteria for what constitutes an “authorized” absence. Others remain uncertain about how strictly to apply the new rules.
The timing has struck many as peculiar. Trustee positions were already facing recruitment challenges before this change. In the 2022 municipal elections, numerous trustee races across Ontario had minimal competition or candidates acclaimed without opposition.
Maria Rizzo, a veteran Toronto Catholic District School Board trustee with 30 years of service, shared her perspective: “We’re already struggling to attract diverse candidates. Adding punitive measures makes these positions even less attractive, especially for parents with young children, people with health conditions, or those from marginalized communities.”
Indeed, data from the Ontario Education Services Corporation shows trustee demographics skew older and whiter than the communities they represent. Barriers to participation appear to be growing, not shrinking.
Parent groups have also voiced concerns. Annie Kidder, executive director of People for Education, noted during our conversation that “trustees serve as the public’s voice in education. Making these positions more restrictive could silence important community perspectives.”
The practical implications became evident recently when Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board trustee Sabreina Dahab missed three consecutive meetings while on maternity leave. Though her board granted formal approval for her absence, the situation highlighted the potential consequences of the new rule.
“No one should lose their elected position because they became a parent or faced a health crisis,” Dahab told me. “That’s not accountability – it’s exclusion.”
Some trustees have suggested the provincial change reflects broader tensions between local school boards and the Ford government. Since 2018, provincial education policies have sometimes clashed with local board priorities on issues ranging from curriculum to COVID-19 measures.
Ottawa-Carleton District School Board chair Lyra Evans sees the attendance rule as part of a concerning pattern. “There’s been a gradual erosion of local school board autonomy,” she observed during our interview. “This feels like another step in that direction.”
Whether intentional or not, the three-strikes rule adds pressure to trustee positions already stretched thin by expanding responsibilities and limited resources.
For now, board chairs like Peel District School Board‘s David Green are advising trustees to be proactive about planned absences. “Communication is key,” Green emphasized. “Let the chair know in advance, have absences formally recorded, and stay engaged even when you can’t physically attend.”
As fall board meetings begin across Ontario, trustees are navigating this new reality while continuing their essential work supporting student achievement and well-being. The question remains whether this attendance requirement will improve accountability or simply create another barrier to inclusive representation in public education governance.
For trustees like Natalie Waddell, the rule change has added unexpected stress to an already demanding role. “We all want accountable representation,” she reflected. “But good governance also requires reasonable accommodation for the real-life circumstances that affect every elected official.”
