Ward

Candidate

Grade

Notes

A

Cheryl Johner

B

Ms. Johner has significant school council and board experience. Her vision and ideas are not explained in great detail, leaving one wondering what she stands for. She appears to have familiarity with board governance, but there are concerns about her ability to be an independent voice.

A

Rory Koopmans

C-

Over the years Mr. Koopmans has run for various public offices without having any relevant experience. He has many ideas, some creative but some quite far-fetched and seemingly unrealistic, and does not have a cohesive vision for the public school board. He is sincere in his desire to serve the public.

A

Kevan Warner

A-

Mr. Warner’s related experience includes work on school councils, the public closure process, serving on a board at the University of Alberta, and also has a degree in education. He has a good understanding of a variety of issues facing EPSB. Although he could articulate his views better at times, there is little doubt he would be an independent-minded trustee.

B

Amanda Beisiegel

B-

Although Ms. Beisiegel has demonstrated she will represent the interests of her ward, she is limited in her experience (school council) and her focus is on just a few issues. Her knowledge of other issues is unknown. She was one of only two participants in the public forum for ward B, out of five declared candidates.

B

Perry Chahal

B-

Mr. Chahal has been an active member of the public in city politics. He is intelligent and committed, but his motives in running for school board are unclear. Questions of a potential conflict of interest have been raised by past trustees, due to his wife concurrently running for Catholic school board. He did not participate in the community forum nor did he provide any explanation. He lists 18 different priorities on his website, which shows a certain level of knowledge of public education but raises concerns that he may need to refine his ideas into a more focused and realistic agenda.

B

Darryl Lagerquist

A-

Mr. Lagerquist does not have much background in public education, but does have a degree and experience in public policy. He has clearly and extensively described his vision and his priorities, and actively responds to comments on his website. He has put forward some original ideas, and has demonstrated a solid understanding of the role of trustee and public board governance.

B

George Nicholson

C+

Mr. Nicholson has vast experience as an educator, principal, administrator and five-term trustee for ward H before retiring in 2007. There are questions as to why he is now running again: he does mention concerns about the direction of the current board, but is short on details. Despite his considerable qualifications, Mr. Nicholson has no website and did not participate in a public ward forum.

B

Ken Shipka

D+

Mr. Shipka seems intelligent, compassionate and informed in his EPSB video, but his track record is one of disengagement and silence since he misspoke in October 2008 for which he immediately and sincerely apologised. He spoke a single sentence during the board meeting where five schools were closed, and has avoided public debate during this campaign (citing “election and trustee commitments” as the reason for not participating). His voting record does display some independence, but the motives behind his voting can only be guessed at since he refuses to communicate with his public.

C

Mary Gradisar

D

Ms. Gradisar did attend a public forum for ward C, but she has not participated in any candidate video opportunities. Her website is very thin on content, having no real platform or other information. Ms. Gradisar seems to be a decent person, but has not displayed the depth or professionalism required for the role of trustee.

C

Tony Henshall

B

This candidate has strong social work experience with youth and has worked as a special needs teaching assistant for five years. Mr. Henshall seems inexperienced and at times inarticulate on EPSB issues in videos, but he does have passion and integrity.

C

Christopher Spencer

A-

With impressive school and community volunteer experience, Mr. Spencer is very knowledgeable on a wide spectrum of issues, and expresses them clearly but with respect for alternate points of view. He has proven his ability to engage and communicate through new and traditional media. That he devotes a page of his website to his views on trusteeship shows the value he places on responsive school board representation.

D

Dave Colburn

A

Mr. Colburn is a model for other trustee candidates: passionate, articulate, determined and yet pragmatic and always respectful and open-minded. Mr. Colburn’s views on issues are clear and consistent, and he is keen to raise the quality and transparency of board governance.

E

Neil MacDonald

C+

Mr. MacDonald has his own voice and would likely be a strong independent trustee. He seems a little lost on occasion when he strays from his script. He comes up somewhat short on concrete proposals. He does have some areas of interest (mainly financial, in line with his background as a charted accountant) but simply says we need to find ways to do things better. He could have shown himself more prepared by expanding on some of these ideas and proposing specific solutions.

E

Heather MacKenzie

B+

Ms. MacKenzie is young and relatively inexperienced, but passionate and intelligent and appears more than up to the job. She has shown courage and leadership in her volunteer work. She will fight for disadvantaged groups like special needs children. She has developed and articulated a comprehensive platform.

E

Ken Soroka

C+

Mr. Soroka brings school council, public board, volunteer and business experience to his candidacy. He appears competent but some committee members expressed concern that he does not put forth many original ideas, and as a consequence may be influenced by others without his own viewpoint. He appears trustworthy and committed to his community.

F

Michael Janz

A-

Mr. Janz brings strong public and community service experience in several roles to the table. He has clearly and completely communicated his vision and priorities, and scores well in public responsiveness. His consensus-building style may on occasion be at odds with independent thinking, but all evidence suggests that he would make an effective, accountable and transparent trustee.

F

Joanna Rozmus

C+

Ms. Rozmus does not demonstrate critical thinking or questioning. Her website has lots of information but offers few specific ideas: it touches on many questions and issues, but her overall platform remains unclear. In short, she is competent, but does she have the necessary leadership and vision?

F

Bev Sawyer

B+

Ms. Sawyer has over thirty years’ experience working in the public school board, which has obvious advantages but may position her too close to the establishment. She would likely work within the system – effectively – to tackle issues. She has proven ability, including the revitalization of troubled schools, and has put forth some very specific proposals such as a special education task force. High marks on experience, but some uncertainty about her independence and vision.

G

Sarah Hoffman

B+

Ms. Hoffman’s platform is a single issue, but the message has been clear and consistent. Armed with a masters degree in education policy, she has worked in politics. She is passionate and well-spoken but has limited public school board experience.

G

George Rice

D

Mr. Rice generally supports the administration as evidenced by his voting record. He supported community schools as a candidate in 2007, but once elected proceeded to vote to close at each opportunity. His current website lists the highlights of his current term, including the opening of six new schools: these six ASAP schools were announced in June 2007, a few months before Mr. Rice was elected. His commitment to democracy, openness to alternative ideas, representing his constituency, and integrity are all open to question.

H

Catherine Ripley

B-

Ms. Ripley has strong experience in education and community. She is very responsive to her ward as a trustee, communicating frequently with constituents and holding/attending meetings in the ward. She always represents the board in a professional and courteous fashion. Her inclusive approach is positive for letting all voices be heard, but the downside can result in a lack of decisiveness and leadership. Ms. Ripley excels at considering all aspects of an issue, but can be somewhat of a chameleon when forced to vote and generally, but not always, supports the administration and the majority of the board. We would like to see more transparency and independence in her second term as trustee, where she clearly articulates her own opinion and then consistently works towards that goal.

I

Leslie Cleary

C+

Ms. Cleary’s experience is mainly as a community volunteer, and does not have any particular public education qualifications. Despite her professional approach she is unfortunately sketchy on details of her platform. She would have received a higher grade had she communicated her beliefs and opinions.

I

Tina Jardine

A-

Ms. Jardine has committed to engaging voters at all levels (including learning to use social media successfully and even “doorknocking” on public transit) and supports the democratic and governance aspects of trusteeship. She has some experience within EPSB but has other perspectives to draw on (such as a union leadership role). Professional and well-spoken, her website could have provided more details of her platform, but in her videos she was quite knowledgeable on many issues: she understands the existing complexities and offered specific solutions. Ms. Jardine also discussed Edmonton Public’s role in challenging the Alberta government on utilization rates, so would likely be a strong, independent voice.

I

Balraj Manhas

C+

Mr. Manhas does not have a great deal of relevant knowledge or experience in education. He has no website, so there is little information on his ideas and platform. He Identifies problems in communication between EPSB and the public, and would likely be a strong representative of the community. Ultimately, there are more platitudes and generalities than specific ideas.