Owen Sound East Area Schools

OWEN SOUND EAST AREA SCHOOLS

March 17th, 2008 at 5:30 p.m.

Strathcona Senior Public School

ARC Membership:
Daryl Wood Facilitator
Heather Pettigrew Alexandra School Community Council Chair
Richard Thomas Bayview School Community Council Chair
Gerda Hatfield Strathcona School Community Council Chair
Linda Thomas Sydenham School Community Council Chair
Deborah Haswell Representative for Municipal Council
Andrea J. Stenberg Representative for Business Community
Marg Gaviller Bluewater District School Board Trustee (Observer)
Marnie Coke Superintendent of Elementary Education (Resource)
Susan Sankey Principal, Alexandra Community School (Resource)
Janice Chamberlain Principal, Bayview Public School (Resource)
Karen Jay-Moore Principal, Strathcona Senior Public School (Resource)
Andy Amos Principal, Sydenham Community School (Resource)
Patricia Boyd Miller Vice-Principal, Sydenham Community School (Resource)
Amy McGuire Recording Secretary
Participant:
Al Gibb BWDSB, Supervisor of Building Services
AGENDA ITEM / ACTION /
Welcome / Meeting commenced at 5:30 p.m. Deb welcomed those in attendance at the fifth Public meeting of the School Accommodation Review.
Daryl Wood, Susan Sankey, and Patricia Boyd Miller sent their regrets.
Motion to approve last meeting’s minutes – Heather moved, Gerda seconded; approved.
Deb Haswell received an email from a parent to be shared with ARC; message forwarded to Cathy Woodley to distribute electronically
Review of Currently Proposed Scenarios with Al Gibb
Review of Currently Proposed Scenarios with Al Gibb- cont’d / §  Dean working on 5 scenarios: Al had capital information to share verbally tonight
§  Setting terminology re: capital decisions:
o  Primary Class Size: Primary classes are capped at a maximum class size of 20 students (as opposed to 23 for Junior or Intermediate level classrooms); School capacity can be overstated in a K-6 school where classrooms are counted at 23 students. Under the Ministry PCS program the Ministry can be approached for funding for renovations/addition to schools under this funding structure (would apply to Bayview which currently has 20 classrooms, proposed as K-3 school in one scenario)
o  Prohibitive to Repair: applies to schools where cost of repairs total more than 65% of cost of new building; however Ministry funds “student spaces” less any empty spaces available within a 6km radius of school in question, schools within that area which are not filled to capacity would receive surplus students first , then Ministry would fund remaining student spaces
§  Scenario #1
o  Two-School Option: SYD – K-8, K-6 FI; BAY – K-3; ALX & STR to close – total of 1000 students in catchment area
o  SYD: would have 590-595 student population; would need to build 11 classrooms, plus music room; Bayview would be fill to capacity
o  55 FI students would be transferred to Hillcrest and Dufferin
o  Coat is about 4.5M
§  Scenario #2
o  Two-School Option: SYD – 4-8; BAY – K-3; ALX & STR to close
o  SYD: would need to add one classroom, plus music room and special education component; 450 student population
o  BAY would require the 11 extra classrooms to accommodate primary students; 600 student population; an issue of lack of space to build onto current building (limited lot size)
o  This option would not fit on the Bayview site and is Capital intensive
§  Scenario #3
o  Three-School Option: SYD – K-8; BAY – K-8; ALX – K-8; STR to close
o  SYD: two to three classrooms addition for Gr 7 8
o  All students would fill existing spaces, therefore no Ministry funding
o  STR students would be returned to their original schools (the Alex issues with building’s age and state of repair)
§  Scenario #4
o  Three-School Option: SYD – as is; BAY – as is; ALX – K-8 in new building; STR to close
o  Capital cost is based on 400 students in a new Alex and is high Capital and no Ministry funding
§  Scenario #5
o  Two-School Option: SYD – K-8; ALX – K-8 in new building; BAY & STR to close
o  Capital cost is $13M plus and there would be little Ministry support so fully funded by the Board;
o  BAY not considered prohibitive to repair (no funding available for new building if it were to close)
§  Scenario #6 Suggestion
o  Two-School Option: SYD – K-8; BAY – K-8; ALX & STR to close
o  BAY: currently has 290 students and 468 capacity (178 spaces available)
o  STR would transfer 193 students; ALX would transfer 155; 55 spaces still available on west side (HIL & DUF);
o  would still require 120 student spaces (built onto SYD)
o  Primary class size still an issue (would need to approach Ministry for funding)
o  Very similar to first scenario financially
Review of Currently Proposed Scenarios with Al Gibb- cont’d / §  Other Issues to Consider:
o  Restrictive factor of easements on ALX site (Bell telephone, sanitary sewer, storm sewer)
o  Busing and grade separation issues
o  Full-day Kindergarten: all scenarios figured at 2010-2011 and based on FTE and therefore if full-time Kindergarten is announced then Ministry will have to fund new student spaces
o  Business priorities and program/curriculum priorities both need to be weighted (balance between cost, programming and age mix; likely no major geographical issues, with the exception of some special needs students)
Questions and Answers / Q – Was there not a favourable opinion of new school option at last meeting?
A – Ministry will want to see program and grade distribution to fit new building capital plan, even prohibitive to repair funding will not offset cost of new building. (Good Places to Learn grant money not yet received from Ministry; BWDSB may not be within Ministry’s prohibitive to repair two-year window; also funding would apply to new student spaces, not necessarily a new building.)
Q – In Scenario #3, where would the STRATHCONA students go?
A – The 193 students would return to their respective schools since all three have Gr 7 & 8
Q – In Scenario #1, wouldn’t so many changes be disruptive to students? In Scenario #2, even more so?
A – Would not consider approaching board with 600 student primary school (i.e., BAY in Scenario #2).
Q – In Scenario #2, would busing costs increase?
A – Busing costs would likely increase with K-3, 4-8 option. Details of busing costs will be available for Wednesday’s meeting. Important to remember that Board will incur costs regardless of which scenario is proposed.
Q – Does Scenario #1 include updates to front of BAY?
A – Currently, no scenario includes the cost of updating parking lot and bus drop-off area at BAY.
Q – Are age and distance travelled components in busing?
A – Elementary students in JK to Grade 6 are bused if travelling more than 1.6km; Grades 7-8 students if travelling more than 2.7km.
Al reminded everyone that, in general, all three-school options generate little Ministry funding; however they also require less funding for extra student spaces by the Board. Two-school options would need to be initialized under the prohibitive to repair (PTR) program to access Ministry funding (would need to “consolidate” STR students to ALX, then apply for PTR funds for ALX); two-school options would also need to acquire primary class size funding for BAY.
Q – Do these numbers account for growth?
A – No. New Pupil Places (NPP) funding could be accessed if a school is operating at greater than 100% capacity for two years; however Ministry requires five-year plan for capital projects
Questions and Answers – cont’d / Q – SYD & BAY are expected to see growth in next few years; where would those new students be housed?
A – Portables would be provided.
Q – What if there is no space for portables on school grounds?
A – Has never been an issue to date; portables need to be 40’ from building and 20’ from each other.
Q – Does the Board have a policy re: who is placed in portables? Are certain ages exempt?
A – There is not a policy to that effect in Bluewater.
Q – Are portables wheelchair accessible?
A – Portables can be made so; however if school is accessible, portable does not have to be.
Q – At the last meeting, there was a firm commitment to leave a school on north side of 10th St. What has changed?
A – That was not a board position, but a committee position (although committee positions are considered first). PTR funding has set requirements that must be met, and keeping a school north of 10th St could affect that; for Ministry purposes, an east-west geographical argument would be more convincing than north-south. Also, Owen Sound building planners are scheduling building on the north-east side of town.
Concern raised over two new schools in north-east area that are not part of the public system; not keeping a Bluewater school in that are could mean that we lose students to other Boards.
Q – What happens to PTR schools not funded for repair?
A – Al provided a case study as an example: a PTR school with declining enrolment, where new building would have been much smaller than original. Consolidation plans were not feasible, so school was taken off of PTR list, then applied for Good Places to Learn grant for “refurbishing” (used to tear down 5000 square feet and renovate 10 classrooms). Board decision after evaluation. Limited funding means that the Plant Department is only able to fund significant student health & safety issues (e.g., roofs, parking lots, asbestos, mould), leaving some schools in poor state of repair.
Q - BAY parking is an issue. Would it make more sense to leave SYD as a K-6 and make BAY a K-8? BAY needs busing updates anyway, plus could take advantage of being within walking distance for more students?
A – BAY issues will be a problem regardless of scenario (some more severely than others).
Q – What about BAY playground area for older students?
A – Could stagger lunchtimes and breaks; BAY already running on staggered lunches for Primary and Junior students
Scenarios to Examine at Next Meeting / §  Hard copies of capital costs for scenarios will be available for Wednesday’s meeting; busing & program pieces to come
§  Updated List of Scenarios to Consider in Greater Detail Wednesday:
o  Scenario #1: Two-School Configuration:
·  a) BAY K-3; SYD K-8 (not popular, but would generate more Ministry funding)
·  b) BAY K-6; SYD K-8
·  c) BAY K-8; SYD K-6
·  d) BAY K-8; SYD K-8
o  Scenario #2: Three-School Configuration:
·  a) ALX K-8; BAY K-8; SYD K-8
·  b) ALX K-8 (new building); BAY K-6; SYD K-6
Concerns expressed over number of schools running grade 7-8 programs and how that could be done effectively; in terms of programming and extra-curricular activities, it would seem preferable to house Grade 7 and 8 students in two schools rather than three.
Questions and Answers / Q – Would grade 4 students not be included in primary numbers?
A – Primary includes JK-3 students, Junior 4-6, and Intermediate 7-8. In terms of primary class size issue, students must be enrolled in school full-time by the age of six (students registered in K programs then withdrawn, would be subject to attendance counselor visits, etc.); also younger students, especially in rural areas, benefit from programming prior to Grade 1.
Q – Are early years, daycare, and YMCA before and after school programs spaces considered in scenarios?
A – No, only Ministry-designated student spaces counted. Generally, gymnasiums are used for other such programming (especially since most do not operating during regular school hours). Early Years programs tend to operate in schools because there are school spaces available (due to declining enrolment and other issues); some early years centres provide own portables for their own use.
Q – Is there a business plan for other program spaces in new scenarios?
A – New school buildings can negotiate for space for new Early Years centres, but funding generally does not necessarily cover capital costs. Early Years centres are expected to pay rent equivalent to operating costs of spaces (which is a problem for them, and other subsidized programs); square footage in building is then operating at a loss.
Q – In two-school scenarios, where would ALX’s Early Years centre go?
A – It could be located to another non-board site, although ALX community had asked for it to be included in plan.
Q – Will capital renewal requirements be included in the report?
A – Yes; they were last updated at Christmas.
Questions and Answers – cont’d / Q – April 2nd meeting is designated for draft proposal presentations, but is committee also receiving public input at that meeting? Does input come before or after presentations?
A – Proposals should be presented first, then feedback taken. Committee has 11 days to consider new information before final proposal goes to board.
Q – How does report get prepared?
A – After Wednesday’s meeting, a writing committee should be appointed. Committee should come to a conclusion on what to recommend. Report will include the four school reports (already completed – changes required to STR, maybe one other?), committee reports, and just a few pages for recommendations. Committee will also need to decide who will present information.
Q – Is the cost analysis component of the report prepared by the Board?
A – Yes.
Q – If the Ministry funds student spaces according to current space provided, what happens if all schools (under NE area review) are considered PTR in 25 years?
A – Students would be consolidated and funding student spaces provided for surplus. Ministry does not consider planning beyond 10 years.