By Pepper Parr
February 14th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Scott Podrebarac called it dotmocracy – you cast your vote by putting dots on a chart.
It is a process used to get a sense as to where the thinking of a group of people is going.
Sort of like a straw poll.
When the dots (three to each person) were handed out to the 14 people on the PARC who vote – there are a number of advisors – there were 42 dots to be distributed.
The official tally won’t be released until the minutes of the February 9th meeting are published. The publishing of those minutes will be delayed a bit – they have to be signed off by the Chair who is going to be away from his desk for a personal matter for a day or so.
The Gazette has been able learn what the two critical dotmocracy results were:
Dots shown are not the official count. The final total was 15 dots.
Option 19, which was the Director of Education told the trustees was the Staff recommendation got 15 dots and
Dots shown are not the official count. The final total was 8 dots.
Option 7 which was to not close any schools got 9 dots.
The Board staff recommendation got just a little less than one third of the dot votes that were available.
The other votes were all over the map.
So – at this point in time – after three meetings the PARC has yet to settle on a choice – things are still quite fluid.
Aldershot is very concerned about what will happen to them if Central is closed and Bateman is getting scarred silly that they might get closed.
Central and M.M. Robinson PARC members write there comments on whether or not they felt a particular option met or did not meet the Framework outline.
The Board has added another day of PARC meetings and is preparing for the first public meeting.
Given the way the December 8th meeting went and some of the hallway conversations that have taken place between parents and Director of Education Miller – it could get noisy.
Many parents look at the data and the facts that are out there and suggest “we are in this mess because Hayden was built” – and that may be so – but the school was built and it did have a significant impact on the class room capacity. There is nothing that can be done – the building isn’t going to be torn down.
The opportunity does exist for some creative boundary re-alignments – and several parent groups who seem to have more of a grip on the numbers than the Board’s Planning staff have come up with some interesting ideas that are now in front of the PARC people.
What we appear to be seeing at the PARC meetings is each set of parents from the seven schools are beginning to do what they have to do to keep their school open.
Nelson is seen as safe because of its iconic status in the city; M.M. Robinson is going to get more students.
Somewhere in all this there has to be some leadership – from either the board staff or the PARC people.
Aldershot high school PARC representatives Steve Cussons and Eric Szyiko are both adept at speaking up and making their point. They can see a yard full of portables coming their way if Central is closed.
There are some very intelligent people within the PARC – will a natural leader emerge and come up with a recommendation that the trustees can vote for?
Don’t expect to see any leadership from the trustees. That crowd is made up of 8 people who are still learning their jobs and a couple of dinosaurs who let this situation develop. There are exceptions: Donna Danielli, who sits on the PARC as an advisor, is in a position to give the PARC a perspective they need.
At this point the Central people are putting out a very strong case – and they are being very active.
Sharon Picken, brash and bold but she knows what goes on in the schools. She is one of the two Bateman PARC members.
The Bateman people realize that their school is at risk and they are now beginning to organize themselves.
The Pearson people are asking that they be given back the students they once had – those that were sent to Hayden where it is said that students are doing their gym classes in the hallways.
At some point a serious analysis has to be done on how boundaries can be re-aligned so that students are distributed more evenly throughout the buildings that exist.
To add to the mix of issues is the cost of the portables that are apparently going to be needed at Aldershot and the cost of transporting hundreds of students by bus.
The trustees sit on the sidelines taking it all in – their time will come in May.
Somewhere in all this data there is an answer. The Board staff are saying that they have put forward an option – close two of the seven schools.
The parents aren’t buying it – the trustees are sitting quietly on the sidelines figuring out what they will do when crunch time arrives for them.
Thank you Tom for continuing to be a voice of reason for all of Burlington.
The final results of the dotmocracy will tell the complete story however, this article and a previous one from the Gazette reveals some of the thinking within the PARC.
Option 19, 15 votes, close Central and Pearson
Option 28, 9 votes (photo from a previous article) close Central and Pearson
These two options combined represent the majority, about 57%, of the PARC vote and have similar results.
John,
You are once again fiddling the data to show how you want it to be.
These options are essentially the same in the biggest results. People are voting for the same thing.
it’s like rigging the candidate list so the same candidate can be voted for twice.
You can’t add these votes to get a legitimate result.
This is pretty obvious, but not to you, who, as always it seems, sees what you want to.
These closure options are the worst possible results for students, residents and the city of Burlington.
Just look at the criteria met and not met. Those met are most often expressed in vague non-specific terms – there are no details.
Those criteria unmet, obviously impact the students directly, in concrete and definitely negative terms.
These options are definitely not about the students welfare.
Unfortunately for the people of Burlington, the Board staff excel at providing rigged and manipulated information and choices to get what they want.
These same staff covertly fabricated a false rationale, to build student spaces that are not needed, for the opening of Hayden.
So, it’s not unexpected that these people can also fabricate a false rationale to close student spaces.
All this does is cover up their gross mistake that created the situation, and they are just covering it up and evading it in order to escape accountability.
And the Director Miller, the boss of all this, is afraid to bring this accountability forward to the table, and he countenances this evasion of responsibility.
This leads only to the conclusion that the Board lacks credibility, which depends on coming clean and being contrite.
If people want this, they will very apparently have to go after it and demand this accountability.
How else can the Board ever be credible and able to be trusted?
Never!
Tom
The PAR process started with 19 options then grew to over 30, eventually reduced to the 14 considered by the PARC at their last meeting.
From those 14 the PARC narrowed down what they considered the best options going forward. As reported the option’s chosen by the PARC can be viewed as three distinct directions, close no schools, close one school and close two schools.
From that, two options suggesting the closure of two schools emerged representing 57% of the vote, as I originally stated.
That’s what the PARC members determined, are you suggesting that data has been fiddled ?
The argument regarding Hayden is an old one that doesn’t change the work of the PARC.
John,
You didn’t get my point.
True democratic voting is one person, one vote. You don’t get to vote for the same thing twice – that’s illegal.
Your logic would approve adding another 2 school closure option, that with the 3rd vote each PARC member gets, could be voted for again.
You would add these votes together as before to add to your so-called “majority”.
A perfect way to corrupt the voting process to get the result you want.
That’s what the Board’s voting scheme and framework is designed, on purpose or not, to do.