By Pepper Parr

June 5th, 2017

BURLINGTON, ON

 

Right from the very beginning Ward 5 Halton District School Board trustee Amy Collard was paying very close attention to what was being said about high school closures in Burlington. While the Robert Bateman high school was not recommended for closure by the Director of Education in his initial report, Collard was acutely aware that its distance from Nelson high school – less than 2km to the west – made it a closure possibility.

The Bateman parents didn’t have their ears to the ground but Principal Mark Duley knew his school was vulnerable.

Because they didn’t feel at risk – the Bateman parents did next to nothing as the Program Accommodation Review Committee wound its way through the seven meetings they held. There were exceptions: Sharon Picken and Lisa Bull, the Bateman members of the PARC, worked very hard to get the Bateman story out. They didn’t realize Bateman was going to end up on the PARC list of schools that could be considered for closure until the third PARC meeting when Bateman was added to the numerous options that were before the PARC.

When the Director of Education revised his initial recommendation and took Central high school off the list and added Bateman, a community that was not ready for the fight of their lives had to pull together. Unfortunately, the Bateman community turned on the Central high school people and accused them of “throwing Bateman under the bus” when what they needed to do was get their story out.

With the PAR committee disbanded the trustees got to hear the delegations – there were 51 of them delivered over two long evening sessions. The Bateman story was very effectively told – what no one could tell for certain was – were the trustees listening; more importantly were they hearing?

Each delegation had five minutes to tell their story and an additional five minutes for the trustees to ask questions – there just weren’t that many really good questions from the trustees.

The public learned Bateman had an auto body paint shop that was close to world class – the equipment had been donated by Toyota; students from that program had gone on to win competitions on the other side of the world.

There was a welding program that was getting excellent reviews and a culinary program that was very popular. The biggest plus was the   Community Pathways Program (CPP) that educated, nurtured and cared for exceptionally vulnerable students.

During the delegations there was a single parent who was deaf and used sign language to communicate with her daughter who was unable to control her bodily functions – but her mind seemed to be sharp. Watching the delegation was a heart wrenching experience. There were other parents with children in the Community Pathways Programs (CPP) who delegated very effectively,

Other than the parents of these children and other students at the high school few knew they were there. It was a truly amazing delegation to watch.

Denise Davy, a skilled advocate brought her experience to the fight – and it was a fight. She got decent CHCH television coverage and delegated very effectively at city hall as well.

But nothing changed.

The response from the Board staff was that these were all programs that could be replicated at Nelson high school where much of the Bateman program was headed if Bateman was closed in 2019

The auto body paint shop – the one at Nelson would be even better; welding – same thing – the Board staff told anyone who asked that the move would give the Board a chance to upgrade everything. They were a little weak on the details.

The transformation from Bateman to Nelson – not a problem – every time the Board staff did a transformation they got better at it, they said.

It was a trust issue and the public, at least for those who were involved in the school closing issue, just did not believe senior staff or the Director of Education.

Board staff seemed blissfully unaware of the depth of that distrust. There were parents who went over the top emotionally – they were the exceptions.

There were also some solid, fact filled delegations that pointed up serious flaws in the way the Board staff had created catchment area boundaries and the selection of the feeder schools.

The Board Planning department seemed prepared to give out whatever information they felt would serve their immediate purpose – then later give significantly different information to an almost identical question.

It struck many as a level of manipulation designed to give the Board staff what they wanted rather than what was best for the community. The Board staff philosophy seemed to be larger high schools offered better program opportunities for students. Much of the evidence from the Board’s research didn’t support that contention.

When the Director’s second recommendation came out with Bateman on the list of schools to be closed, the activists at Bateman accused the Central parents of throwing them under the bus and things got very nasty.

The issue was now before the trustees and Amy Collard was now able to do what she had been wanting to do – get some ideas on the table and find the solutions that would prevent the closing of a school.

There was a public hungry for information but there wasn’t much the trustees could do up to this point.

They had created a Program Accommodation Review Committee (PARC) then they had to stand back and let that committee do its work.

Collard, along with all the other trustees, had to sit on their hands, while two parents from each of the seven high schools discussed the options that were before them and began narrowing a long list down to a short manageable list.

The PARC did a lot more than Board staff expected – while they didn’t disband with a consensus they did narrow down the options – from the 30 they were given, to which they added a dozen or so – got narrowed down to five.

The surprise for the people at Bateman was that they were now on the list of schools that were being considered for closure.

When the PARC came to an end it was time for the public to delegate. There were 51 of those heard over two public meetings.

For the first time the public got a sense of what Bateman was really all about. The depth and significance of their programs had not been discussed openly. The parents with children in the school knew the story – the public hadn’t heard it in so much detail.

Bateman had a superb story that wasn’t told until public delegations were heard;  by that time they were fighting an uphill battle.

Lester B. Pearson had a story as well– about how they had been stiffed by their Board with hardly a word from the trustees and less than a peep from the ward trustee.

Pearson had had the bulk of its feeder school taken away from them and given to Hayden high school where the overcapacity was approaching the 140% level.

The delegations ranged from some rather silly ideas to emotive pleas from parents to not close “their” school. There were also a number of very good delegations – excellent as a matter of fact.

Each of the trustees reacted differently to the delegations – some had strong relationships with the schools they were responsible for and they worked their connections. Others clearly didn’t understand what their job was and others failed to reach their potential as trustees.

The public isn’t at all aware of how hard these women work. While they grapple with a very significant closing schools decision, they are working their way through the budget – the school board is the biggest employer in the Region.

They meet weekly, which we don’t see at the municipal level. They are for the most part diligent and struggling to fully understand the longer term impact of what they decide to do on the June 7th.

It was a decision to create the Hayden high school in Alton made in 2008 that started a series of events that put the Board of Education in the position it is in now.

To add to the really messy situation is the way the Board of Education communicates with its public. Director of Education Stuart Miller has been very direct and said on more than one occasion that the Board doesn’t do a very good job at communicating with the public.

Add to that some parents whose emotions got the better of them and made statements that were just not true.

It has been a very difficult story to cover

Collard who has more Board experience than the other three Burlington trustees, has been very proactive in looking for solutions. She hasn’t always gotten the attention many of her ideas deserve but that hasn’t deterred her in the least,

Following the delegations was an “information” meeting of the Board during which Staff set out to defend the recommendation that the Director had presented the trustees.

Collard was the first person to put a question to Director Miller when the information session started – which he basically said he wasn’t going to answer.

Miller was surprised and caught off guard – he was expecting to be able to explain his decision and position now that the PARC had done its job and the trustees had heard all the delegations.

Miller was there to defend his recommendation which Collard wasn’t buying. Each trustee had many opportunities to ask questions of the Director’ recommendation and to pepper him with questions based on the material that came out of the PARC and the 51 delegations.

How did they do? They asked a lot of questions and Miller along with his Planning manager Dom Renzalla and PARC Chair Scott Podrebrac handled them reasonably well.

The “information” session went much longer than many expected – they were still at it when the Chair chose to recess the meeting for a week – and come back at it again.

During each of these session Collard kept hammering away at what could and should be done with Bateman.

The senior Board staff kept giving the trustees smooth assurances that the transition from what is in place now to what they will end up will go just fine.

A number of the trustees weren’t buying that line.

Gerry Cullen, Superintendent of Facilities was already measuring Nelson for the influx it was going to experience with the number of programs that would be transferred from Bateman to Nelson in 2019.

Collard’s objective is to keep the Robert Bateman high school open – and she has put two possibilities on the table.

1) Develop a partnership between Bateman and Nelson

Students from both schools could attend classes at either school. This would increase the breadth of program offered to all students.

Students in Essential, Community Pathways and

International Baccalaureate programs would continue at Bateman without disruption.

The commercial grade kitchen facilities at Bateman would continue to be viable.

Centennial Swimming Pool would be accessible to all students at both schools.

The auditorium and stadium at Nelson would be accessible to all students at both schools.

The OYAP and SHSM programs offered at each school would be available to students at both schools.

Collard said the operationalization of this idea would need to be determined. Her preliminary thoughts as to how it might be accomplished included:

Each school continuing to offer the full suite of required courses – as well as the specialized programs that are already in place – to the students in their current catchment area. Students wishing to participate in courses offered at the alternate campus could decide to take their entire course load or half of their course load (morning or afternoon) for that semester at that campus. Regional programs would continue to be offered at their current locations.

Each school might offer specific courses – for example Students in Grade 9 regular English program could have Physical and Health Education and French at Bateman in the morning periods and Math and English at Nelson in the afternoon periods. This would give all Grade 9 English program students at both schools access to Centennial pool for their Physical and Health Education program.

Shuttle bus – it is about a 20-30 minute walk between Bateman and Nelson, so they may want to provide a shuttle service between the two schools.

Collard argues that this approach increases equity of access to program for all students at Bateman and Nelson and it increases equity of access to facilities, including the Commercial Grade Kitchen, Automotive and Welding Shops, Auditorium, Greenhouse for all students at Bateman and Nelson. It also does away with the emotionally difficult transitions for students in Essential or Community Pathways Programs

This approach also eliminates the need to move the International Baccalaureate Program from Bateman to Central high school – problem with that is Central needed those IBL students to get its enrollment numbers up – and – the IBL has a certain cachet to it that Central would like to acquire.

Collard pointed out the her suggestion reduce renovation costs at Nelson which were set at $12 million.  The suggestion preserves the ability to maintain the YMCA Daycare at Bateman and ensures the viability of Centennial Pool and increases access to extracurriculars for all students.

Collard does concede that the suggestions does require some creative logistical efforts – especially in the first year of implementation

Transportation might be required to ensure students can attend classes at both campuses – these costs might be mitigated since students living in the eastern area of the Bateman catchment (who would be redirected to Nelson if Bateman were to close) would not require transportation to Nelson.

Creating community partnerships:

Collard also saw some significant opportunities for real Community Partnerships. The unique specializations offered at Bateman have considerable community appeal. The Commercial Grade Kitchen at Bateman could be used in a partnership with the Halton Multicultural Council (HMC) to help newcomers to Canada learn hospitality skills that can lead to gainful employment. Collard had a conversation with the Executive Director at HMC who happen to be seeking a space in which to provide this type of program.

Bateman offers skilled trades that aren’t currently available at The Centre for Skills and Development; specifically automotive and culinary. A partnership with The Centre could be beneficial to the community.

Collard has done what parents have a right to expect from their Board of Education trustees.  She has been both proactive and innovative. One cannot say as much for the ward 4 trustee. The high school in that ward, Lester B. Pearson, has gotten more support from the city Councillor who has zero clout on the high school closing issue.

Collard is not a popular trustee. She doesn’t expect to win a popularity contest; she wants to do the job she was elected to do. She was acclaimed as the ward trustee during the past two municipal elections. She served one session as vice chair of the Board and has sought the votes of her peers to serve as Chair – that has not been forthcoming.

Collard is abrupt, she is direct. She tends not to get into much of the chit chat with the other trustees.

But – and this is important – she is the only trustee who has put a solution, an alternative, on the table. Her fellow trustees may not follow her lead – but they can and should give her ideas full debate and consideration. If they cannot accept her approach they might want to look at option 7 – don’t close any of the schools – until there has been a more fulsome and through debate.

Denise Davy made a very significant point when she noted that the city of Burlington spent more time and debate on deciding where to put the Freeman Station than the school board has spent on closing two high schools

By Pepper Parr

May 23rd, 2017

BURLINGTON, ON

 

We published a statement about meetings Director of Education Stuart Miller was said to have had with Burlington MPP Eleanor McMahon.

No such meetings took place.

Miller did have conversations with McMahon, by telephone and they lasted a five or so minutes.  McMahon had questions about the process.

We have already apologized to Director Miller and will make our apologies to MPP Eleanor McMahon. There were extenuating circumstances – it was a long holiday weekend and people were not available. That doesn’t excuse the error we made.

The information we were given was false, and known to be false by people working to keep Bateman open. One, a former journalist, knows better than to make comments that she knew or should have known were false.

The other person the information came from was described in the article as a less than reliable source.

Stuart Miller said he and his staff changed their recommendation when they learned the full Central high school story and that their information came from the information that came out during the PARC process and documentation the Central parents made available to the board.

The Central enrollment, while not as high as the Board would like it to be, is understood to be stable.

“To close Central and have 600 students on buses every day would seriously jeopardize the educational experience these students would have and add close to $500,000 a year to transportation costs that they board already knows are going to increase” said Miller

“Closing central would not have done anything to enhance the educational experience.”

The projected Central enrollment was seen as stable. “And we did not make any allowance for whatever intensification might do for either Central or Aldershot: said Miller.

“We changed the recommendation when we learned the full Central high school story.”

By Staff

May 22nd, 2017

BURLINGTON, ON

 

Jeremy Skinner, a Ward 5 resident with three students enrolled at Robert Bateman delegated to the Halton District school Board trustees and set out before them what his view of the issue before them was: “The challenge before us is how to maintain student equity in the delivery of programs and opportunities when student enrollments change.”

“I believe that the question before us is whether we have sufficient capacity amongst MM Robinson and Dr. Frank J. Hayden to permit the closure of Lester B. Pearson and whether we have sufficient capacity below the QEW to close Robert Bateman?”

Skinner said he felt “obligated to suggest that we “punt” by partitioning some or all remaining Secondary Schools to include students in Grade 7 and 8 like Aldershot and Burlington Central. This will have a positive affect on each Secondary School’s utilization rate which will buy us sufficient time to validate what our ultimate Elementary & Secondary School Network should look like and how best to transition to it.”

The benefits doing this include:

protects capital and staff investments which have already been made at Robert Bateman and Lester B Pearson.

provides flexibility in the board’s capacity response to spikes in future enrollments in Burlington North by enabling three Secondary Schools to respond.

Benefits Grade 7 & 8 students through exposure to a wider range of programs and opportunities such as the technical trades at an earlier grade.

Implications:

Current elementary school catchment boundaries will need to be reassessed and redrawn as required.

Current secondary school catchment boundaries will need to be reassessed and redrawn as required.

Elementary schools may result in underutilization and thus may have to close.

Skinner added that “In the case of Lester B Pearson, I believe that the short-term risk for closure is too high because too much is dependent upon redirecting student enrollments associated with Dr. Frank J. Hayden to other Burlington-North Secondary Schools. I believe that this risk could be mitigated through Trustee led community discussions to seek agreements for student enrollment to Burlington-North Secondary Schools.”

Skinner then enlarged his field of view and said: “We need to consider the City of Burlington’s revised Official Plan, currently in draft, which identifies 8 major areas of intensification. They are:

the Downtown Core and related Downtown Mobility Hub;
Uptown Centre located at Appleby and Upper-Middle Road;
Mobility Hubs which surround the Aldershot,  Burlington and Appleby GO stations;
The Fairview St. Corridor, and
Most major plazas

The intent is to provide for mixed-use of residential, retail and commercial development of these lands. This will likely take the form of:

relocating the bulk of ground level parking underground or into multilevel purpose built parking towers;

locating retail and/or commercial on the ground and lower floors which comprise the podium of mid-height and high-height residential buildings; and

integrating townhomes and/or stacked townhomes.

An illustration as to what is envisioned, can be found on the east side of Appleby Line from Corporate Dr. to Iron Stone Drive, just below Upper-Middle Rd. Please note that most of these areas of intensification are in South-Burlington. Regardless as to location, they must be considered in future Long Term Program Accommodation (LTPA) plans.

Given the information above, Skinner “questions as to whether we will have sufficient capacity in South Burlington in the longer term to warrant the closure of Robert Bateman which is best positioned to serve the proposed Appleby GO Mobility Centre.

He suggests “Partitioning Secondary Schools permits us to restore some of the Secondary School catchments back to what they were prior to the erection of Frank J. Hayden which covers North-East Burlington. Then we would adjust each Secondary School catchment to accommodate our best forecast of student enrollments from new residential neighbourhoods.

“Regardless as to which, if any, Burlington Secondary Schools are to close, I believe we are dependent upon HDSB to ensure that current students who are most vulnerable to change and those who seek a career based upon Technical Trade Skills.

“Accommodation of these students and their programs will require significant investments to any Secondary School which is to receive them.

“I seek clarification for the statement made that “ Nelson will need to add technical shops and special need facilities to accommodate students transitioning from Robert Bateman.”

Skinner concedes that “that we have some uncomfortable decisions to make. The decision to even contemplate the closure of one or more secondary schools has a significant impact to the community fabric.”

By Tom Muir

May 17, 2017

BURLINGTON, ON

 

Tom Muir has been a relentless commentator who asked the hard questions and pressed even harder for answers and the information he felt the public was not getting.
Today – he writes the 11 Halton District School Board trustees outlining their role and the obligation they have to the public that elected them. Muir delegated to the Trustees last Thursday

Dear Trustees,

I have been considering the experience I observed on the evening I delegated to you  and wondering how you are going to move forward in the delivery of your duties and responsibilities.

Frankly, there is scarce evidence of your views or intentions in debating this report toward making decisions, and I find this troubling.

This week, May 17, as you know, there is another tabling of the Director’s final report, a formality for final decision on June 7. However, this tabling really only begins your task of, and responsibility for, a transparent and accountable decision-making process. I cannot delegate in person, so please accept this as a written delegation for the record.

This information report tabling allows for your opportunity for deep questions, analysis, and for motions and resolutions for amendments and changes to the Director recommendations.

I have troubling questions about how strong the Trustees are in decision-making in this political context, and if there are any Trustees who will say no to the Director and Board.

I have provided much information, analysis and commentary on this matter, so you should be familiar with this body of evidence, and what it says about the PAR process so far.

The Board and the Director constantly worked at obstructing my efforts to engage the process and investigate the Conditions 1 and 2 that formed the justification for the PAR.

My requests for relevant information were constantly ignored and/or refused. I was forced to go to the Office of Information to request pertinent information, and then I was subjected to more obstruction.

The information I was able to get, which I have provided to you, gives evidence-based proof that the state of utilization that the Board cites as Condition 1 was knowingly and deliberately caused by the Board.

It’s irrefutable that the declines in utilization of those schools are planned declines, the direct result of Board actions.

I’m having problems with how you are portraying the utilization of the schools, like it’s due to natural causes and demographics, and therefore that’s the problem, not the Board’s intention and action. You have been doing this for most of the time since this all started. This misrepresents the situation, and is not truthful.

As I said in my delegation of May 11, utilization in Burlington was planned and directed so as to fill a NE Burlington school (Hayden), and the evidence clearly shows that this was done by choking the life out of 4 of the 6 existing Burlington schools, with premeditation.

The current UTZ was planned long ago, and imposed by the Board – it didn’t just happen by itself. I have provided proof of this in the data.

But rather than getting to the bottom of how to fix the underlying causes, the Board focused on stopping release of pertinent information to me and the public, including forcing me to submit an FOI request, and even then further obstructing and refusing the release of information.

The current situation of low utilization was caused by the Board, and only by them. Refusing to be transparent and accountable for this is the big lie of the Board.

Now using this PAR, the same Board is now blaming the victims, and recommending that two of the six victims be sacrificed by closure.This recommendation by the Director came right at the start of the PAR, with no public discussion.

To decide the closures, the victims were pitted against one another, a process still ongoing, but it didn’t matter. After a long process the Director still wants his two victims.

His reasons are not the true context, but as they say, if repeated over and over again, people will eventually believe it.

For truth in your deliberations, you have to note each time that you discuss utilization, that the rates of UTZ are the result of a conscious decision by the Board, and implemented in their planning by building Hayden and putting 1500 students there from the other schools and their feeders, causing the planned declines in UTZ in those schools.

Now, as the result of these known consequences, they want to close schools to make it up, and that’s part of their plan too.

There is no accountability, and I think that’s part of the Trustees job to call out, but it’s not evident.

What I have seen is a general administrative failure of transparency and accountability by all the Board, and a failure to show visible oversight on the part of the Trustees.

Do you plan on doing anything to correct this misrepresenting slant, and the failure of accountability?

The Director’s report also speaks of Condition 2 for the PAR. This mentions that the PAR will address questions of equity of opportunity for students, but I see no concrete problem analysis, or details of solutions.

The report also states that “reorganization involving the school or group of schools could enhance program delivery and learning opportunities.” Please note that the Condition 2 uses the action words “could enhance”. It does not say “will” and so guarantees and specifies nothing.

There is no transparent and accountable information provided by the Board indicating any details of the delivery of this Condition 2 aspect of the PAR. There are only abstract assumptions, and ideology, that larger enrollments and schools allow for this. This assertion is disputed by education studies, and by parents and students in Burlington.

I repeat the point made about how much the financial operating savings are with closures of empty spaces. The $2 million operating cost savings is the only operating funding that is spent on maintaining empty spaces. Since there is no increase in budgets for instruction, more programming cannot come from there,

The PAR Policy statement says that; “Decisions that are made by the Board of Trustees are in the context of carrying out its primary responsibilities of fostering student achievement and well-being, and ensuring effective stewardship of school board resources.”

I remind the Trustees that you will be closely watched to see how your decisions fulfill these duties and responsibilities, in a transparent and accountable way.

I ask you to demonstrate how closing Bateman fosters student achievement and well-being in our most vulnerable, and needing of extra support, children? After seeing some of these kids at the delegations, I don’t know how you could in good conscience close their school for so little savings and so much cost, as the most expensive option.

And show me how removing the possibility of the small school experience of Pearson, with the integrated day-care facility, fosters the same things, while providing a test of the real validity of the large school ideology currently dominating the Board planning and design.

And I look forward to you showing me how you equate the ensuring of effective stewardship of school board resources with the closing and loss of 2 of Burlington’s community schools, and the gain of practically nothing of significance in the financial and fiscal condition of the Board. The ignoring of future growth needs, and social changes, is especially reckless regarding closure induced over-utilization, and risks of pressure for renewed future schools and capital needs.

Remember again, it was the Board that created this problem in a planned, deliberate way, and this added cost of school closures in this deliberate plan, in building Hayden, must not be swept under the rug in an attempt to forget it. That is what I see happening now.

I argue that based on demonstrated benefits to student achievement, and stewardship of school board resources, now and in the foreseeable future, there is no case to close any schools. There are simply no demonstrated financial gains in closing schools, thereby destroying the community of Burlington schools, to provide any meaningful benefits. This is the truth of the matter.

Indeed, it is always in the best interest to deliver and act on the truth, because there is no telling what harm will come of leaving out these details in the future. That’s really what happened by leaving out the truth of Hayden’s impact, so please, let’s not compound that mistake by closing schools.

At bottom, we are not only dealing with numbers or dollars, but instead with children, and essentially the future of our community. This makes our decisions much more important than just taking care of business.

The trustees have within their authority the means to move boundaries, feeders, and programs in order to undo the skewed enrollment caused by building Hayden without considering the consequences.

Hayden was built and filled with students by transfers from existing schools that can just as easily be undone.

In conclusion, the Trustees do not have a pressing need to close schools, and it appears that on planning, financial, fiscal, risk, student benefits from demonstrated significantly enhanced academic offerings as opposed to known negative impacts, the real net economic effects looked at closely, and the impacts on the overall school community, it makes no sense.

If you happen to disagree with this assessment, it is your responsibility to demonstrate your reasons in a transparent and accountable way.

By Pepper Parr

May 15th, 2017

BURLINGTON. ON

 

Steve Armstrong was one of the 14 members of the Burlington community that sat on the PAR – tasked with being the conduit between the Board of education and the community.

It is safe to say that every member of the PARC believes the process was badly flawed and resulted in communities fighting with each other rather than working together to find a solution that worked for everyone.

The PARC leadership was not able to find a route to a solution; the PARC members did begin to coalesce around the option that called for no school closures. What the PARC did do was reject the original recommendation which was to close Central high school and Pearson high school.

The second recommendation recommended closing Bateman high school and Pearson high school; that led to a much closer look at just what Bateman had going for it – a lot more than many people realized.

That realization and the better late than never arousal of the Bateman parents brought some exceptionally valid information the public didn’t have before. We will have more detail on just what Bateman does have going for it; as much if not more than Central.

Steve Armstrong, a Pearson parent said in his delegation that the Board of Education’s utilization (that portion of the capacity of a school that is being used) sits at 75% and, based on the Board’s projections, will hit 80% in 2020.

That 75% is a city wide number – it includes all the schools – some of which are at the Board policy utilization level of 90% while others are at significantly below.  Pearson is one of the schools significantly below.   Armstrong believes that “If these sorts of numbers (75%)  were being seen at each of the schools we wouldn’t be undergoing this process.”

Armstrong prepared a series of graphs, one of which showed that Burlington’s overall actual enrollment bottomed out in 2014, and is presently on the rise. He also shows yearly Long Term Accommodation (LTAP) for as far back as 2006. The curve labeled as 2010 represents the 2010-2011 LTAP data.

“Just focusing on the pattern associated with 2020 enrollments we can see that from the 2010 projections up to the most recent data provided to the PAR Committee there has been a strong increase in the expected numbers. Over 700 students to be exact, and 2020 isn’t very far away.”

Armstrong notes that this pattern is also seen in the Oakville data, but is a little more “bursty”, and makes bigger jumps when it moves. Not surprisingly the accuracy of the projections goes down, in both municipalities, the further out one looks.”

“The Region is growing, the City is growing, high school enrollment is growing, and the pattern has been that the projection errors tend to underestimate the actual numbers. This isn’t to surprising as the Board recognizes the planned housing growth at a different point than the City does.

Given the known near term growth, and the lower confidence in the projections beyond 5 years, extreme caution regarding closing schools is merited. Especially if it involves selling real estate assets in return for short term cash benefit.”

“High over utilization (crowding) creates problems, and low enrollment numbers will reduce some opportunities for studnets. Both situations alter the student experience, and we have these conditions present in two close proximity schools located in north Burlington – Hayden and Pearson. As the image below indicates they show a large overlap in “walkability” zones.”

The most recent projections indicate that if nothing changes Hayden will grow in size and be 600+ students over capacity by 2021. And there is no room for additional portables or a permanent addition on that site.

Option 19 had proposed to move the French Immersion (FI) program to MM Robinson as a way to deal with this looming issue. The Board had also listed in its Options the idea of capping enrollment, with extra students being redirected to an overflow school.

The PAR Committee also briefly discussed boundary changes, but ultimately the present recommendation stays with moving FI, and monitoring the situation going forward.

Armstrong has great concern and takes “exception to the simple notion of “monitoring”,.

Armstrong argues that the “enrollment numbers for Lester B Pearson as depicted in this graph “we can visualize three sets of data. The upper most curve represents the projected enrollment prior to a boundary change associated with the opening of Hayden. The boundary change purposely reduced the expected enrollment to just below 600 students. Apparently smaller enrollments where Ok back then! The actual enrollment went off the plan quickly, and significantly. Presently that school is sitting 30% below its planned student body, and indeed those 392 students are witnessing the problems of too little enrollment.”

Armstrong doesn’t have much faith in the Board’s plan to monitor.  “If monitoring simply means standing by and watching then that is unacceptable. If 30 % off target isn’t enough to trigger action what is? The Board needs to put a stronger set of actions around tracking and managing, and the Trustees needs to press for frequent reporting back to them” he said.

Armstrong wil tell you that “Hayden definitely has a “vibe” to it, and it’s more than just being a new building. “When I toured the school as a PARC member I couldn’t help but feel that Burlington needs more of this. In reality, feel probably has little to do with the age of the walls.”

Armstrong likes the idea of conjoining Hayden and Pearson as a way of combining the best of both schools. “If Hayden’s Principal was to also oversee Pearson, similar to what happens with some elementary schools, would this not help ensure success? Since the goal is that some of the students presently going to, or about to start at Hayden, would be instead attending Pearson, why not bring some of the teachers over as well he asks.

Pearson has been a vibrant smaller school in the past, and not everyone is seeking out everything that a large school has to offer. Armstrong points out that currently 25% of Pearson’s students do so through optional attendance. A similar percentage also attend Bateman’s English stream program through optional attendance. Apparently there is value in having such environments available both north and south of the QEW.

With a proposal like this both student bodies expand their programming options, in an environment most suited to their preferences.

“The current set of recommendations would move the city’s overall utilization from the present 80% trajectory to 108%. Based on the historical inaccuracies of the projections beyond the 5 year mark this plan greatly increasing the risks of requiring capital intensive construction in the future.

“Hayden’s projections involve it running at 150% of capacity by 2021. Redirecting FI to MM Robinson to relieve overcrowding is too critical to simply leave to “monitoring” the progress.

“Closing Pearson removes close proximity capacity from the North, eliminates an option for smaller school attendance, and takes what by 2020 will be a 88% utilization up to 111% overall for the remaining 2 schools.”

“Change isn’t always easy” acknowledged Armstrong. “Perhaps starting with a smaller project, that would develop better community based problem solving, is in order.”

Armstrong has come to the conclusion that Pearson is necessary to give Hayden some breathing room and to continue the community based approach to problem solving.  He was a strong advocate for retaining access to a smaller school in the North.

The PAR committee members were asked to rank the options that were before them.  Each of the 14 PRAC members were given two dots to put on which ever option they favoured. The objective was to begin to whittle down the 40 plus options that were on the table.  The results made it immediately clear that there wasn’t going to be anything near the consensus the Board would have liked to see.  It also meant that the trustees had a very hard job ahead of them.

After his three months of work on the PARC, Armstrong feels the trustees need to vote for the “close none of the schools option” and allow time for the Board, with significant involvement from the community, to fully study the issues and finally get it right.

Like many in the community, Armstrong believes that Hayden should not have been built – but it exists and parents are going to have to live with that decision.  That is is a fine school today, even though it is over crowded, should not blur the issues about what is done with the other six high schools.

 

By Staff

May 10th, 2017

BURLINGTON, ON

 

The following are the people selected as delegates to address the Halton District school Board trustees on the matter of closing high schools in Burlington.

Earlier in the week the trustees listened to 24 delegations and managed to ask a paltry five questions with three of them coming from one trustee.

Chair Kelly Amos didn’t say a word other than to open the meeting, thank the speakers and close the meeting. Engaging the people who elected them seems to be beyond this crop of elected officials.

 

Tracey and Joelle Howard will speak on the closing of Robert Bateman

Cheryl Delugt, a member of the PARC will speak on the closing of Lester B. Pearson

Elyse Matthews is a community member.

Tammie Beattie will represent the interests of the Special Education Advisory Committee (SEAC)

Jane Cooper Kelly is a Community Member

Dr. Lisa Van Zoost will speak for Nelson high school

Diane Miller will speak for Lester B, Pearson.

Adam Peaker is a community member

Tom Muir is a community member who has written at length on why the Board of Education is in the situation they are in. He speaks as a Community Member

Debbie Wakem will speak for Robert Bateman high school

Steve Cussons will speak for parents at Aldershot high chool

Jeffrey Huang Ma will speak for Robert Bateman HS

Maeve Fitzgerald will also speak for Robert Bateman HS

Cassie White will speak for Robert Bateman high school as well.

Camryn McKay will speak for Robert Bateman

Denise Davy, who has worked tirelessly for the interests of the parents with children at Robert Bateman, will delegate Thursday evening.

Barbara Heller will speak about the Gifted Programs

Natalie Hiltz will also speak on the Gifted Program

Julie Hill will speak for Robert Bateman HS

Heather deHaan will speak for Robert Bateman

Stephen Beleck will speak for Robert Bateman

Brent Hall is a Community Member

Tracey Bruton will speak for Robert Bateman HS

Lauren Olsen will speak for Burlington Central HS

Jason and Kelley Bartlett will speak for Robert Bateman HS. Jason has in the past been a member of the Special Education Advisory Committee (SEAC)

Steve Armstrong, who was a member of the PARC will speak for Lester B. Pearson and for Hayden high school

Douglas Emerson will speak for Lester B. Pearson high school

Renée Sirbu will speak on the International Baccalaureate program

Kathy Berglund will speak for the Aldershot HS

Heather McElrea will also speak for the Aldershot HS

Ron Raj Reddy will speak on the International Baccalaureate program.

The delegation meeting of the Board of Trustees on Monday met at the Board of Education offices – if you were not a delegation you had to watch the proceedings at M. M. Robinson high school, a couple of hundred yards away.

The turn out at MMR was 21 people which narrowed down to 17 as the evening wore on. The Board made every effort to keep a crowd that had the potential to get noisy out side the building.

The policy is not to allow any emotional response from the public. That doesn’t square all that well with a policy that lets the trustees applaud when they are handing out awards to members of the public.

Closing any school is an emotional process – the Director of Education said having to tell the staff at Bateman high school that he had recommended the closing of that school “broke his heart”. It’s doing a lot more than that to the parents of the students at Bateman.

There is nothing wrong with people allowing their emotions to overflow. This Board and these trustees seem to be afraid of hearing how people really feel.

When things get noisy or even a little rowdy – a strong chair has a gavel and can call a meeting to order very effectively; that of course is the problem – the chair isn’t very strong.

A man named Jim Young, an Aldershot resident with a passion for getting better public transit service for seniors in Burlington once told that city council that council was not theirs – it was something they held as a sacred trust on behalf of the public – and we thought he was right.

The 11 trustees were elected to represent the public and ensure that the teachers and board staff deliver the service the province directs them to deliver and that the public wants.

So far – not one person has stood up publicly and said that closing a high school is a good thing for Burlington.

Trustees – fill board +
Eleven of the people at the meeting will decide which, if any of the high schools in Burlington are to be closed. There doesn’t seem to be any public support for closing the schools.

At a recent Board of Trustee meeting the 11 members poured over the plans for a new high school on Milton; they talked about where hallways should be, where recreational facilities should be – they sounded like a family designing their new hone. They had all kinds of questions.

They need to be as deliberate and as responsible and as involved and as engaged with the matter of closing a school. This isn’t a game.