The Halton Catholic school board may be taking a step back from its recent charity donation ban — at least for the time being.

The issue of the injunction, which has received significant public backlash in recent weeks, came to a tipping point at Tuesday’s Catholic school board meeting resulting in its abrupt end after several trustees left in protest following the dismissal of a motion related to the ban.

Put in place in February, the ban prohibits financial donations to charities and non-profits that support, directly or indirectly, abortion, contraception, sterilization, euthanasia or embryonic stem cell research.

Read More:

Halton Catholic school board finds 30 charities that comply with its policy

Your letters | Halton board’s charity ban renews debate about public funding for Catholic schools

Halton Catholic school board hears student outrage over ban on charities that don’t reflect religious values

Parents were then mailed a list of charities that had received donations from schools within the board in the past, stating it was reviewing which charitable organizations may continue to receive donations from its schools in light of the new decision.

The list initially consisted of 100 groups including the Halton Women’s Place, Toronto’s SickKids Hospital and the Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation, but was shortened to 30 after the March 20 board meeting. The list was then posted on the HCDSB website, briefly.

On Tuesday, chair Diane Rabenda disallowed a motion that included publication on the board website of a list of approved charities and non-profit organizations supporting research that proves their compliance with resolution 61-18 and any documents that may undermine the approvals, among other items.

This led to a heated discussion between Rabenda and Oakville trustees Paul Marai, Anthony Danko and Anthony Quinn.

As Rabenda attempted to move to the next agenda item, the three Oakville trustees intervened to appeal her dismissal of the motion. They cited bylaw procedures in an effort to get a vote on it by the governing board.

“Our bylaws state we must on vote on overturning your ruling and a simple majority carries. That’s what our bylaws state. It’s the governing body of our organization,” Marai said.

Rabenda responded to Marai by stating he was attempting to overrule a resolution of the board, prompting Jim Lochrie, a certified professional parliamentarian and teacher of parliamentary law, to chime in on the debate and ultimately side with the chair on her decision.

“In my opinion, what the chair did was correct,” said Lochrie, which elicited applause from the crowd and a counter response from Marai.

Quinn attempted to appeal to Lochrie, Rabenda’s “right-hand man,” which drew a sharp response from the parliamentarian figure.

“I am a parliamentarian that was hired to give advice to the chair, actually all the trustees. It was quite (rude) what you just did,” said Lochrie, garnering more applause from the audience.

The HCDSB chair made the decision to dismiss the motion, as suggested by trustee Arlene Iantomasi, because she felt the board had ignored the Education Act by enacting the ban before completing consultation with stakeholders.

“This board passed a resolution two meetings ago, at the most. That resolution stands. That resolution says we have to go out for consultation. We can’t do anything until we get the consultation back,” Rabenda said.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

After some more back and forth on the resolution and board bylaws, the meeting was finally able to proceed on to the next item, however, Marai, Danko and Quinn then left their seats, along with Susan Trites and Helena Karabela.

As a result, the meeting lost quorum and was adjourned prematurely.

All remaining agenda items were pushed to the next scheduled board meeting on Tuesday, April 17.

Trustees weren’t the only ones upset at the meeting.

Before it abruptly ended, HCDSB students Ben Sabourin, who spoke at the March 20 meeting, and Julia Joseph presented their strong opposition to the ban.

Among their chief concerns was their belief the board ignored sections of the Education Act when enacting the ban.

“You, the HCDSB board of trustees, have not only ignored, but rather blatantly disregarded this law. You have failed to seek feedback from your constituents in regards to motion 61-18. We, your stakeholders, are going to hold you accountable,” said Sabourin.

In passing the motion, Sabourin claimed the board also disregarded its own policy, regarding fundraising practices, passed Sept. 27, 1983, and amended June 21, 2016.

“This board failed to ensure that resolution 61-18 reflected the values and expectations of parents, students and staff members. Instead, you consulted with each other, briefly, might I add,” said Sabourin.

Speaking on behalf of stakeholders, Joseph said they demand change and “we will not stop until we see it.”

“Until then, we will be back tomorrow and each and every day that follows,” Joseph said, eliciting applause from the audience.

Since the policy approval, an online petition to overturn the motion has garnered more than 21,000 signatures.