By Pepper Parr
November 7th, 2016
BURLINGTON, ON
Dania Thurman made her first delegation to city council yesterday. It was not that pleasant an experience for her – even though she gave a strong, informed presentation.
Council didn’t ask her a single question about what is perhaps one of the most important issues about the kind of downtown the city is going to have in the future.
Thurman argued that closing the Central High school would damage the downtown core community.
Dania Thurman – vice chair of the Central High School parent group.
Thurman is the Vice-Chair of the parent group opposing the closing of the high school. She was delegating along with another parents the same time that Halton District School Board, Director of Education Stuart Miller was explaining to council the why behind why high schools had to be closed.
The T-shirt tells it all – for the parents – it is about the community.
Central Strong, the working name of the parent committee, was formed to organize and inform the downtown core residents, parents, alumni and business owners who will be impacted by the Halton District School Board’s proposal to close Burlington Central High School explained Thurman.
They have 2000 people a week going to their Facebook page and the 500 lawn sighs printed have been snapped up
Thurman said: “Burlington Central High School is the heart and soul of our downtown community and generations of students have attended and excelled there. Our Central Strong team is committed to keeping our school open so the students can benefit from the true community spirit of our school. This includes everything from dedicated staff (many of whom are also alumni), unique programs (like robotics, theatre and theatre tech), and the joy of walking or biking to school every day (which has also been proven to increase student focus and overall success).
“We truly hope that the recommendation to close the Central and Pearson schools is indeed only a starting point for discussion as was indicated by the Director of Education and the Chair of the Board of Trustees.
Central High school corridor – the place reeks of local history.
“Our group’s mission is to provide as much accurate information as we can to aid in finding alternative solutions. Our opinion is that Burlington Central is not the right choice to close and we will work as a community to find creative alternatives to the issues the board may face that don’t involve the closure of Burlington Central High School. We believe that alternatives exist and would be healthier for the students, families and the community than a school closure.
“In addition to this, the Central Strong Community group has officially aligned itself with the growing uproar from the Ontario Alliance Against School Closures, who are calling on the government for an immediate moratorium on school closures. The Ontario Alliance Against School Closures represents 27 school groups across the province. It also has the support of “The Community Schools Alliance” which represents 33 municipalities and approximately 350,000 residents.
Thurman argues that the Ministry’s Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline, as it is currently written, is both damaging and undemocratic. It fails to take into consideration, the value of a school to its community, municipality and local economy. Close to the entire student population at Burlington central can currently walk to school. The physical and mental health of our students impacted by these closures and consolidations is completely disregarded. The municipality should also be concerned as this will ultimately result in increased busing.
“Our environment and an already congested infrastructure will only further deteriorate. You should also be deeply concerned about the narrow vision of the Pupil Accommodation Review process and how it will affect our city and Burlington’s Strategic Plan.”
Thurman was direct, brought up strong arguments but didn’t get a single question from city council.
Michael Kukhta, also a member of the parent group delegated. He was asked a lot of questions which we will cover in a seperate story.
It is a reality, as you say, but it should not be seen as an open-ended thing, with no cautionary stops along the way, up or down, in terms of growing or cutting the numbers.
Well functioning organizations, or systems, and a city certainly is, need a certain level of redundancy, or extra capacity, which is more critical when things are being reduced in supply or number, and replacement options are lost as well.
This extra capacity serves as a reserve and buffer against changes and fluctuations in external factors and the need. It works to help correct errors, mistakes and to stabilize.
In other words, there is a certain irreducible number of some things that are needed for the effective functioning of the whole system, and its protection against changes.
Like we have two eyes, two ears, two lungs, indeed two of many things. Our functioning is impaired with the loss of one, but losing both is crippling. Modern airplanes have enormous factors and levels of redundancy, for obvious reasons.
We need a certain irreducible level of schools capacity, and this includes the an appropriately located capacity to have schools.
So my point is we need schools everywhere they were built. The extra capacity is money in the bank to buffer the changes that are certainly going to come from the growth and changes the city is facing, and that the province and Council are advocating.
I don’t think it can be said that we absolutely have too many schools, and especially too much and too many of the functions and products and factors that schools represent and deliver to people.
So the city has a big stake in this for all the things I listed, and Council has a responsibility to the residents they represent to pay attention to these things and account for them.
This is no time for silos, artificial divisions, and neglect of care and concern for these things.
A sad reality is that schools due change enrolment numbers which is not the end of the world . Secondly why is Burlington Council asked to be involved when this is clearly a School Board and Ministry of Education decision ,no wonder they appeared not to listen , Burlington will survive with the closing of Pearson and Central and to equate closings to loss of community spirit is a bit of a stretch
The director of education delivered a lot of information to council explaining the reason’s and process for reviewing the underutilization and program delivery of Burlington high schools.
As the director said Burlington has 1800 spaces that aren’t used, making fair and equitable program opportunities for students a challenge to deliver.
Reviewing the meeting video and the directors information will help to understand what is really happening.
The PAR committee that is being formed needs to be as unbiased and objective as possible to provide the trustees with information that is in the best interest of the students. Unfortunately when a political component is introduced there are obvious conflicts and pressures, some even have children that are students in high school.
Council will be asked to have a councilor or designate be a member of the PAR committee. In the best interest of the students, council has the option and should avoid political influence by selecting a representative that could help this very important process be as objective as possible.
So here we go again, robbing Peter to pay Paul. Stealing Burlington schools to build in Milton. An irreversible action that is disgusting in its betrayal.
This will rip the beating heart out of the downtown, and the LBP neighborhood.
We need a revolution to stop this confiscation of community assets, bought and paid for by residents.
It could start with the trustees telling the bureaucrats that this is not on, and they need to come up with another plan. Or if forced, they could resign, and let the province fix the mess.
If the intensification development plan that the Mayor and city are pushing does not need a school in the downtown, where 70% of the new is supposed to go, then the plan is fundamentally flawed in its conception and contradiction with any closure plan.
There’s no “complete communities” in this plan, and never will be if it happens.
Let’s hear from the Mayor and Council on this. We need a motion to direct staff to provide a report on potential school closings and the strategies that can be developed to protect community assets for future generations.
I would start with the following investigation. I would like you to direct staff to examine what the City and communities will lose if schools close.
We all know that schools have many uses and values. People come and go from our schools at many times of the day and week all year, and for many reasons. I ask that the City document all these comings and goings, all of the ways that people interact with the schools.
Are not most schools considered to be community schools? These interactions are in fact part of the glue that ties neighborhoods and communities together.
This will include recreation, sports and athletics, adult education, day care, social and other clubs, public meetings, and any other activity that uses the school buildings.
I also ask that you consider how the schools enter into the City parks and green-space plans, and into good municipal planning in general.
What about the loss of property values, since we all know that schools, and green-space in a neighborhood add to the price of housing there.
Is the City prepared for assessment appeals and the loss of tax revenue, or is this something to be ignored, and denied when the time comes?
Following this we need a public debate on this threatened confiscation of community assets and the multi-faceted impacts on the city.
This is just the start of the threatening things forming the Medusa Head of school closures. There is much more to be said.
Let’s roll!
This question of closing schools due to student population happens over and over again in communities other than Burlington and the Halton School Board. The provincial government pays for the number of students in each school board and the number of spaces/buildings in a complex analysis. Milton is booming with increasing population while Burlington is not.
Sorry, Central’s number is up probably due to student population shift from downtown Burlington to Milton. Since Burlington is in the process of intensifying residences by replacing single detached homes with more dense population in townhouses and apartments, this may be used to argue why Central should be saved if it can be proved that the numbers will shift to a higher student population in five years?
City council has to be cautious about what it formally states as the Halton School Board is not under the city of Burlington’s control. The provincial government has the big say and not city council or even the Halton School Board.
Central’s enrolment is increasing, not declining.
Another example of the mayor and council not really caring about the concerns of Burlington residents. Is anyone surprised??? If Brent Todarian has made the presentation, I bet he would have received a response.
Really!! anyone who has delegated or who knows that it is simply the law to allow for delegations and is simply smoke and mirrors…is not a veteran to the system!!!!