By Pepper Parr
February 2, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Sometime later this year the Director of Education will present the Halton District School Board trustees with a report on what he believes should be done to solve the problem he has with more than 1800 empty high school seats in Burlington.
The four Burlington trustees are glued to this issue.
Director of Education Stuart Miller is going to have to write a major report on school closings sometime in May.
Each will read over the Director’s recommendation and consider the views of those who chose to communicate with them.
When the four Burlington trustees decided to run for office and serve on the school board they entered public office with a set of values they would use to guide them in their deliberations.
The Gazette wanted to know what the driving force was for each trustee.
Was it a desire to serve the public? Was there a burning desire to resolve a school related problem in their community?
Maybe they just wanted to get out of the house a couple of nights each month.
The Gazette set out some of the possible driving forces and asked each trustee to rank them from their perspective and the importance they give to each when they make a decision on accepting or not accepting the Director’s recommendation.
We asked:
Is the driving force for you:
The financial impact of closing or not closing a high school in Burlington?
or is it
The impact the closing of a high school will have on the quality of the academic offering the closing of a high school will have on students in the communities that will be impacted?
or is it
The impact the closing of a high school will have on the community it is located in. Where does community rank in your view?
We asked: Do you feel schools are a vital part of a community and that every community should have a school in its neighbourhood?
In ranking the possible driving force for each trustee we asked:
Financial – academic – community. Label them 1, 2 or 3.
There are going to be some long hard board of trustee meetings in April and May.
We added that a trustee may feel there were other choices and invited them to add those choices but to first rank the three we set out or them.
We then invited each trustee to write whatever you wanted to expand on your choices and the views they had to support their choice.
We suggested 350 words on each choice is reasonable but write longer if they wished.
Leah Reynolds – trustee for the ward Central high school is located in.
We asked the trustees to respond within ten days but added that – if you feel you need additional time – be in touch and we will work with you to give you the time you need.
In our request we made some comments saying that “The closing of two high schools is a very significant event – it is a decision you are going to have to make based on the information you are given.
“We would like to report on the philosophy and vision for education that you bring to the responsibility you have as a school board trustee.”
We thought the request was a reasonable one.
Andrea Grebenc: “I’ll get back to you” – she didn’t.
Tracey Ehl Harrison: A polite note – but no answers.
The trustees didn’t see it that way. Two of the 11 trustees sent a note saying they would get back to us; they didn’t.
One trustee, Leah Reynolds, sent a very long response which we will publish as a separate article.
The Chair of the Board of trustees stunned us with her response which was:
The Program and Accommodation Committee (PARC) have not started their work and trustees are reluctant to comment on anything that might either impact or impede the work of the PAR committee.
We (the Board of Trustees) are ultimately the decision makers and are aware of the importance of letting the process proceed as outlined in the policy. Trustees must maintain our objectivity, without influencing or appearing to influence the PARC process.
School board chair Kelly Amos – decides to speak for all the trustees.
The Gazette felt this was a critical time and that the public deserved to know where these women come from in their thinking.
Tom Muir, an Aldershot resident who comments frequently in the Gazaette said: “This is their job, and if they don’t want to do this for their own “political” motives then they have lost their way, and are not representing us. Commenting is not the same as trying to affect the vote
We will put these questions to the trustees again once the Director has sent them his report.
Having the views now would give the public an opportunity to lobby the trustees who are there to listen to the views of the people they represent.
These people cannot hide – they have an important job to do.
The reply from chair Amos, “We (the Board of Trustees) are ultimately the decision makers and are aware of the importance of letting the process proceed as outlined in the policy. Trustees must maintain our objectivity, without influencing or appearing to influence the PARC process”
She gets it, trustees need to consider all the information prior to forming an opinion or making a decision.
These are great questions to ask trustees before an election, asking them during a very important review of our schools and while parents are providing their input is a fishing expedition, they just weren’t biting.
I am not sure why you are stunned. Your questions were inappropriate and tried to catch the trustees. I think the chair’s response is very logical and reasonable and the person who has lost their way with their bias is Tom Muir. It would be irresonsible for the trustrees to respond at this stage as it would likely impact the report they should, like a judge in a trial, remain neutral until all information is presented then recommend what makes most sense to the entire population. To do otherwise would be to show bias. This is acceptable for your readers to show as they are not elected to make the decision and are nimbys wanting what is best for them not all of Burlington or Halton. Trsutees represent greater interests than thos in Central or Pearson school area.