Never mind the loss of land and homes in Rural Ontario due to the Wind Fraud foisted on unwilling communities. Never mind the huge, inflated electricity bills for electricity that isn’t even produced by Wind Turbines or Solar panels. Never mind the closure of the Forest Industry because of the fake “Turtle presence” inside our wildlands. ………..I could go on but now let’s focus on the next disaster in the making!
Get ready to try and justify why your small school that has been the centre of your town or village for many generations, should stay open!
Where are our Municipal leaders in this? Why isn’t there a collective outrage amongst community activists? Why aren’t parents collectively standing shoulder to shoulder in trying to save what used to be a sanctuary of learning and guidance for our young people growing up in an ever increasing hostile world?
The general answer when the school question surfaces within communities which is: “why are they trying to close our schools” is: “well it’s happening all over Ontario!”
That isn’t an answer. That’s what the Government wants to be as an answer. A nonsensical parrotting that means nothing except an excuse to drop the conversation.
One will see an announcement in their local paper where a Committee from their local School Board will call for a public meeting to “Accommodate Students” in the present day lower than average student enrollments across Rural Ontario.
This isn’t the first period in Ontario’s history where student levels have decreased. There is an ebb and flow to population growth and this is just one of those periods. It doesn’t mean there should be a knee jerk reaction to close up schools and “herd students” into a central location to save money on delivery of education!
One answer to this conundrum would be to decrease the number of teachers and rooms within those schools to accommodate the lower numbers (ever heard of the one room school house in the past?). Then when student enrollment increases in the future. the space is still there to accommodate them.
Once closed, forever closed.
One other thing, If there is a cut back on delivery costs of education, do our taxes decrease as well?…..NOT ON YOUR LIFE!!
Here’s an example of what’s comin’ at ya!
Accommodation Reviews are recommended when it is believed that the Board should consider:
- school closures/consolidations; or
- reassignment of greater than 50% of the school’s population to another school(s).
Under the Board’s Accommodation Review Policy 305, there is the establishment of an Accommodation Review Committee. This Committee is to include membership from the broader school community such as parents, educators, board officials, and business and municipal leaders.
There are currently no active reviews.
Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines
- Memo 2009:B7 – Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines
- Revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines
- Administrative Review of Accommodation Review Process
In support of our strategic priority to maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of our operations, the Renfrew County Catholic District School Board has approved the establishment of a Pupil Accommodation Review.
The review will be carried out for:
• St. John Bosco Catholic School, Barry’s Bay
• George Vanier Catholic School, Combermere
• St. Andrew’s Catholic School, Killaloe
• St. Casimir’s Catholic School, Round Lake
• St. Mary’s Catholic School, Wilno.
The process will involve the formation of an Accommodation Review Committee (ARC) over the coming months. The mandate of the ARC is to review and make recommendations concerning accommodation options for the 5 schools. Recommendations may include school closures and/or consolidation and/or renovations or additions.
The ARC will be comprised of community stakeholders including a parent from each of the schools under review, a representative for the community, and a representative for teachers and non-teaching staff, principals and school board administration. In total, the ARC could include up to 12 members. The ARC will develop options to improve educational opportunities and operating efficiencies to best meet the needs of elementary students in our communities.
In keeping with the Ministry of Education’s Pupil Accommodation Guideline, the Board’s Pupil Accommodation Review Policy and its Procedure on the Accommodation Review Committee Process, the ARC is scheduled to present its findings and a report to the Director of Education in February 2014. Trustees would then receive reports in March 2014 with a Trustee decision scheduled for May 2014.
Commencing in September 2013, 10 ARC working meetings and four public meetings will be held. The first public meeting will take place on Wednesday, October 16, 2013. Information will be posted on the Board’s website throughout the ARC process.
Contact us at: ARC@rccdsb.edu.on.ca or call us at 613-732-1469
First meeting will be at St. John Bosco Catholic School in Barry’s Bay on October 16th/2013
Just read what the Ontario Government had to say about these Accommodation Reviews back in 2005. It seems they now “embrace” these draconian measures instead of trying to stop them.
Chilling to think we are in the hands of a Government that is “hell-bent” on destroying a way of life in Rural Ontario that was once the backbone of Ontario’s proud heritage of “being all things to all people”!
It appears now that this Liberal Government has embraced the U.N.’s criminal Agenda 21 plan for humanity.
To berate the Harris “Common Sense Revolution” which of course was a total disaster, and them embrace an even more destructive policy for our young, 10 years later, in my opinion, is the height of HYPOCRISY!!!
Review of the Renfrew DSB school closure decisions
Renfrew County District School Board
School Closure Decision Review Summary
Introduction – Ensuring Good Places to Learn:
For over a decade, Ontario residents witnessed the accelerated closure of hundreds of schools, particularly in rural areas, as boards followed provincial guidelines and tried to live within funding constraints from due to cutbacks and a one-size-fits-all funding formula. Many communities experienced the collective dread of “accommodation reviews” that tended to isolate public participation from the decision-making process. The same period, lasting until 2003, also saw the deterioration of hundreds more schools from inadequate repairs and/or insufficient preventative maintenance. It had reached the point where about 85 per cent of Ontario ‘s students were being taught in buildings that need at least one major repair.
In December 2003, the Ministry of Education asked Ontario school boards to honour a moratorium on school-closing to permit an integrated overall review of school facility needs in the province. A full inspection of the status of all Ontario school buildings was completed in 2004.
In February 2005, the McGuinty government released Good Places to Learn, a sweeping 18-month action plan to rebuild Ontario schools to the standard our students require. It set out the new policy direction and goals to achieve a high standard for the environment in which our students learn, together with the resources and flexibility to make that environment achievable across the province.
The key components of the Good Places to Learn Plan are:
- Rapid upgrades to the condition of all facilities through the largest-ever capital renewal injection – allocating funding for more than $4 billion in school repairs, additions and new school construction
- Elimination of artificial financial incentives for boards to close schools and providing new guidelines for school closing procedures requiring tangible consideration of the implications for communities and local economies
- Better value for capital grants and new capital planning guidelines to give boards more certainty
- Open decision-making, improved board oversight and increased public participation in capital planning
- Facilities planning that are driven by student needs rather than the other way around. In particular, boards are required to consider new government initiatives including the cap on class sizes from JK – Grade 3, new programs for 16- and 17-year-olds to reduce drop out rates and early learning and childcare spaces through our Best Start Plan
- Boards are to develop a “school valuation” approach that measures each of four sets of considerations about the school, including its value to: the student, the community, the school system and the local economy. The valuation will also demonstrate the business and education case for potential replacement schools and help shape eligibility for operating grants.
Independent Reviews – Transitioning to Good Places to Learn:
The announcement of the new policy marked the beginning of a transition phase moving from the old school closure guidelines and capital planning requirements to the new guidelines.
A handful of boards chose not to observe the provincial moratorium and did not apply the new policies and guidelines. Instead, they proceeded with closing decisions arrived at under the old provincial guidelines. To ensure that as many Ontario students as possible would benefit from the new facilities policy, and to minimize public expense, the government appointed independent facilitators to conduct reviews.
The facilitators were asked to determine:
- Whether the spirit of the new school closure guidelines and capital planning guidelines had been met; and
- Whether there was a substantial benefit to students or the community if the decisions were subject to the new guidelines.
Reports have previously been completed and released for the Lakehead District School Board and Ottawa-Carleton District School Board. So far, the facilitators recommended that eight schools be subject to the new guidelines, while eight schools were permitted to be closed.
Renfrew District School Board Closure Decisions:
In May 2005, Joan Green, a former director of education for the Toronto District School Board and the founding CEO of the Education Quality and Accountability Office, was appointed to conduct a review of the board’s decision of March 2005 to close seven schools: Alexander Reid Public School (P.S.), Horton P.S., Laurentian P.S., Ross Mineview P.S., Keys P.S., Morison P.S. and Calabogie P.S.
Over a two-week period in June, the facilitator met with students, parents, community members, board officials, trustees, teachers and principals. The purpose of the meetings was to understand the process adopted by the board throughout their accommodation review and gauge the level of community input and participation from each of the groups. In addition, the facilitator spent time reviewing the accommodation documentation supplied by the school board and various submissions from parent groups, school councils and municipalities.
Upon completion of the review, the facilitator found that while the board’s decision process was in keeping with the old school closure guidelines and met some of the expectations of the new guidelines; it did not sufficiently meet and would benefit from the principles of the capital planning component and the school valuation process of the new facilities policy.
The facilitator concluded there were grounds for the board to reconsider its decision to close two schools, Morison P.S. and Calabogie P.S. The facilitator determined there was not a substantial benefit to be gained from subjecting the remaining five schools to the new guidelines. She recommended that the board vary its decision by reconfiguring transportation plans so that parents had the choice of sending the students of Ross Mineview P.S. to an additional receiving school in the Town of Renfrew.
The facilitator recommends that the board reconsider the decision to close the following two schools: