Open Letter: Concerns Regarding Mandatory Centralization of School Council Fundraising

---

Editor’s note: The Toronto District School Board’s latest shenanigan involves a motion to tax productive school councils and use their power to redistribute a portion of parent-raised funds to address inequity—namely, that some councils raise far more funds than others. Like me, Paula Glick is incensed by the motion. She recently sent me a draft of her letter to TDSB trustees, and I invited her to post it on Tackle. Paula is a Responsible Investment professional, a current TDSB Parent Council member, and a mother of two children in the TDSB.

---

Dear TDSB Trustees:

I attended Alexis Dawson's Ward 9 Trustee meeting last week on March 20th and was surprised and disappointed to learn about the motion to centralize a portion of school council fundraising efforts with mandatory contributions. Interestingly, the prevailing sentiment among the diverse group of people in the room was clearly opposed to the proposal. I went home to do more research and found the Toronto Star article from the same day. While the other trustees mentioned in the article thought this proposal for a mandatory ‘tax’ or ‘tariff’ was an awful idea, Alexis Dawson, was quoted saying that her constituents support and are requesting mandatory contributions. I found this representation concerning especially after our meeting the night before. I live in Ward 9 and am not aware of any broad consultation or survey conducted among parents or community members to substantiate this claim. To suggest otherwise risks misleading the public by implying a level of support that has not been demonstrated transparently.

The Toronto Star article discussed the results of a small survey that took place in 2023 with 323 responses, and within that group, only 16% of respondents agreed with a mandatory donations fund.

While I appreciate that centralizing fundraising aims to address equity among schools, mandatory centralization is not an appropriate solution. The strength of school councils lies in their voluntary nature, allowing parents the autonomy and creativity to tailor fundraising initiatives to the unique needs and culture of their schools. Removing this autonomy risks dampening enthusiasm, innovation, and overall participation in fundraising activities. Experience and history suggest that enforced uniformity diminishes rather than enhances engagement.

Further, centralizing funds introduces additional bureaucratic layers, requiring the hiring of administrators to manage distributions, diverting our donations and resources that could otherwise go directly to students. This approach also concentrates decision-making in the hands of a few, reducing transparency and democratic accountability. Schools with modest fundraising capabilities may find themselves burdened by the administrative task of applying for funds that were taken away in this mandatory redistribution, diverting valuable time and effort away from their priorities.

Parent councils are fundamentally driven by their deep commitment to their schools and neighbourhoods. Their voluntary efforts are fueled by intrinsic motivation and a genuine desire to improve educational opportunities and community well-being. Introducing mandatory contributions may inadvertently undermine this spirit, replacing goodwill with obligation and diminishing overall community involvement and satisfaction.

Moreover, many school councils already voluntarily collaborate with and support neighbouring schools or specific projects, demonstrating a natural inclination toward generosity and cooperation. Rather than imposing a mandatory redistribution model, TDSB could instead facilitate communication about specific fundraising needs across the district. Whether it be a working document, and /or regular updates from the TDSB, or from PIAC [Parent Involvement Advisory Committee], regarding ongoing projects, school councils would most likely take an interest and contribute where they see alignment.

Imposing mandatory fundraising contributions not only risks damaging the organic goodwill of parents and outside donors but also sets a troubling precedent. Centralizing control of partial funds under TDSB authority undermines the core principle of community-driven support for schools.

I strongly urge you to reconsider this motion and instead pursue meaningful, collaborative and voluntary solutions that respect the autonomy and intentions of school councils.

Thank you for your consideration.

Paula

---

Editor’s postscript: Let me amplify a point that Paula raised: less than 1 in 5 of 323 parents surveyed in a consultation on the plan favoured mandatory redistribution of school council funds—the option that a slim majority of nine trustees recently voted to support. This consultation is news to me. Although I live in Ward 9 and have two children in TDSB schools, I, like Paula, wasn’t consulted on the plan. If I had been, I would have said no. I would have said that if such a plan were to be entertained, it should be voluntary, allowing parents to retain control of decisions regarding the labour and resources they put into cultivating the welfare of their school’s community. I would have said that a voluntary program would be much more widely supported—and indeed, of those supporting an equity program for redistribution of the school council funds, twice as many of those supporting a plan favoured keeping it voluntary (60%) as did making it mandatory (30%), but so much for following the results of one’s consultation with stakeholders. So much, too, for faith in charity and letting communities find humane solutions to their social problems. When you’re vested with decision-making powers, BOGSAT wins. The motion, which passed in a 5-to-4 vote, still has to pass in a vote by the full board of trustees to be adopted, so let’s hope sanity prevails (but don’t hold your breath).

---