A trustee with the Red Deer Catholic Regional Schools who was criticized for a post she made on social media regarding the LGBTQ2 community has been allowed to continue in her role.
Monique LaGrange, however, is facing several consequences for her actions, including a requirement that she take sensitivity training. But her lawyer says it’s unlikely LaGrange will be able to meet the requirements of the board.
An August social media post on LaGrange’s account — which was later deleted — showed two images: one of a group of children holding Nazi flags with swastikas, the other a group of children holding rainbow Pride flags.
Above the images were the words “brainwashing is brainwashing.”
The post sparked calls for her resignation.
In a Sept. 1 statement, the Red Deer Catholic Regional Schools (RDCRS) board of trustees said LaGrange’s post “does not align with the principles and values that guide our division.”
LaGrange was removed from her position as director of the Alberta Catholic School Trustees’ Association on Sept. 8. The Alberta Teachers’ Association called for her to resign or face sanctions over the post, which ATA president Jason Schilling called hate speech.
RDCRS has held several board meetings to discuss LaGrange’s conduct and was in communication with Alberta’s education minister. There was a meeting on Tuesday.
“I want to assure you that from the very beginning, we treated this matter with the upmost seriousness,” RDCRS board chair Murray Hollman said Wednesday. “We explored all available avenues as a board to address this situation while keeping the wellbeing and safety of our educational community at the forefront of our actions.”
Hollman said the board has policies and procedures it has to follow.
“We’re working through the process,” he said. “All we can do is re-emphasize that this was one trustee’s view and it was not the board’s view.”
“It’s going to take some work on our part as a board to re-emphasize these points I’ve talked about — that we are safe and caring, we believe in diversity and inclusion, we love everyone — and really get out in the community and really be seen. I do believe that there will be some fences that need mending.”
In a motion made on Sept. 26, the board found LaGrange in violation of the trustee code of conduct and the Education Act.
LaGrange is still allowed to attend regular board meetings.
However, several sanctions were put in place, including:
- LaGrange is censured from being part of board committees or attending and participating in board committee meetings;
- She cannot represent the school board or school division in any official capacity;
- She must cease making public statements about issues connected to the LGBTQ2 community and the Holocaust;
- Within 90 days, LaGrange must enroll, at her own expense, and complete sensitivity training about Holocaust, sensitivity training about discrimination faced by the LGBTQ2 community, sensitivity training covering professional school trustee boundaries and appropriate use of social media, cultural sensitivity and human rights;
- She must provide a sincere public letter of apology to school division students, staff and board for the post
- The school board will complete an educational workshop with the Friends of Simon Wiesenthan Centre;
- The school board will complete an educational workshop with the Alberta Human Rights Commission;
- The board will provide written reasons in support of this motion to the trustee in the next 20 days;
- The board chair and superintendent of schools may take those steps necessary to implement the terms and conditions set out in this motion.
“It’s very clear and very black and white what needs to happen,” Hollman said. “The board is also undertaking training so it’s a balanced approach.”
After 90 days, the board will refer back to the policy and review LaGrange’s case in relation to the trustee code of conduct.
LaGrange’s legal counsel, lawyer James Kitchen, said his client is not happy with the sanctions.
“We think they’re inappropriate, potentially unlawful. Certainly an overreaction, certainly based on disingenuous — and that is, intentional — misunderstanding of what she said, mixed in probably with an overreaction … If there is an understanding of what she actually said and what it actually meant, then sort of like a feigned overreaction to it,” Kitchen said.
“If you properly understand what she said, then the question is well, do we silence, do we censor a school board trustee because she said something that’s very thought provoking that some people find offensive, that raises a lot of uncomfortable, difficult issues?
“And, you know, her position is, well, no,” he continued. “That’s the messy business of democracy, as the court has said.”
Kitchen said LaGrange shared the image but didn’t create it.
“It was really about the idea that you could have indoctrination of young children into all kinds of complex ideologies that they could not possibly comprehend. And that if they did comprehend, they very well may not approve of. And that only happens because adults with political agendas put the flags in the children’s hands and have them wave them,” he said.
LaGrange’s lawyer said she hasn’t yet decided on next steps but that they could include requesting the board’s decision be judicially reviewed at the King’s Bench.
“We could file an application to the court to have the court review it and decide whether or not it was lawful.”
Kitchen says it’s unlikely that LaGrange will comply with the sanctions.
“There doesn’t seem to be any way that she would be able to satisfy the board on this without violating her conscience.
“She would have to sort of feign agreement with with all of the re-education that she’d have to go through, and then she’d have to write a letter of apology. And you know she’s not sorry. She’s made that very clear.
“She meant what she said and said what she meant and she’s just a sincere person,” he added.
Kitchen said he and his client are waiting for the board to specify which sections of the Education Act and trustee code of conduct it alleges LaGrange was in violation of.
“Those details would have to be in there. You cannot have a legally defensible decision without actually identifying what the impugned person has actually done wrong. IE: What sections they have actually contravened.”
In a statement to Global News, the Central Alberta Pride Society said it “is both saddened and disheartened by the decision to allow Monique LaGrange to remain as a trustee.”
A spokesperson for the organization said it also feels “that the resolution requests are somewhat adequate, but this is not enough in this case.”
“We still want her removed, whether voluntarily or involuntarily,” they said.
“Her recent appearance and speech during the 1MillionMarch in Red Deer on Sept. 20 speaks volumes to the fact no level of courses or training will change her beliefs towards the LGBTQ2S+ community.”
For its part, Alberta Education said the board has the ability and autonomy to disqualify a trustee.
“Each school board is required by law to develop a code of conduct that governs the conduct of a trustee. It is the responsibility of each school board to determine whether a trustee has violated that code of conduct and if so, decide how they want to deal with the matter,” Education Minister Demetrios Nicolaides said in a statement Sept. 27.
“The board has the authority and independence to manage its own affairs and I respect their autonomy.”
Comments