5/23/2017 - Regular Board Meeting
THAMES VALLEY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
2017 May 23
BOARD ROOM, EDUCATION CENTRE
The Board met in regular session on 2017 May 23 in the Board Room at the Education Centre, meeting in
public session at 7:00 p.m. The following were in attendance:
TRUSTEES
ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS
M. Reid (Chair)
J. Bennett
R. Campbell
C. Goodall
G. Hart
P. Jaffe
B. McKinnon
A. Morell
Regrets:
S. Polhill (-9:06, +9:28)
A. Pucchio
P. Schuyler
S. Suvajac
R. Tisdale
J. Todd
J. Skinner (+8:27)
L. Elliott
C. Beal
S. Builder
K. Bushell
R. Culhane
M. Deman
K. Edgar
L. Griffith-Jones
R. Hoffman (-9:22)
R. Kuiper
D. Macpherson
P. McKenzie
B. Moore (-9:12)
V. Nielsen
L. Munro (-9:12)
M. Moynihan
S. Powell
J. Pratt
K. Wilkinson
B. Williams
T. Testa
B. Keast
S. Kim
N. Lavdas
C. Wiercinski (-9:12)
1. CALL TO ORDER
Board Chair M. Reid called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and acknowledged the traditional
territory on which the Board meeting is held.
2/3. O CANADA
The appreciation of the Board was extended to John Wise P.S choir for their performance and to
Conductor Lac-Hong Phi for leading in the singing of O Canada and three musical selections.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved on motion of Trustee Hart, seconded by Trustee Jaffe.
5. OFFICIAL RECORD
Supervisor B. Williams read the following official record: “We regret to record the death of Xavier
Garrett, a student at Algonquin Public School on 2017 May 13.”
6. RECOGNITIONS - None
7. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – None
8. CHAIR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chair Reid welcomed newly elected Student Trustees Nicholas Lavdas and Seoyoon Kim.
N. Lavdas and S. Kim will begin their role as Student Trustees effective August 1. The election for a
First Nation Student Trustee will take place in the fall.
9. DIRECTOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS - none
10. PUBLIC INPUT – None
2017 May 23…2
11. MINUTES OF THE 2017 APRIL 25 REGUALR, 2017 MAY 2 AND 2017 MAY 3 SPECIAL BOARD
MEETINGS
a. Confirmation of Minutes
The minutes of the Regular Board Meeting of 2017 April 25, Special Board Meetings of 2017 May
2 and 2017 May 3 were adopted on motion of Trustee Todd, seconded by Trustee Campbell and
CARRIED.
b. Business Arising from the Minutes – None
12. STUDENT TRUSTEES’ UPDATE
a. Student Trustees’ Update
Student Trustee Suvajac reported a Student Advisory Council meeting was held 2017 April 21.
The minutes from that meeting were previously shared with the Board on 2017 April 25. The next
Student Advisory Council meeting is scheduled for 2017 June 1.
Trustee Pucchio reported the Student Trustee Election took place on 2017 May 18. S. Kim, a
grade 10 student from A. B. Lucas S.S., and N. Lavdas, a grade 12 student from Sir Frederick
Banting S.S., were elected to the position of Student Trustees for 2017-2018.
13. REPORTS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION
a. 2016-2017 Thames Valley District School Board Enrolment Verses Capacity Summary
Executive Officer K. Bushell presented for information the summary report indicating the 2016-
2017 On-The-Ground (OTG) Capacity of schools versus the 2015 October 31 Full-Time Equivalent
(FTE) count (item #13.a)
Questions regarding school capacity, the use of portables, and FTE calculations were answered
by Administration.
b. Public Delegation Presentations Report – Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review (EPAR)
02
K. Bushell referred to the report (item #13.b) provided to Trustees in advance of the meeting. In
summary, there were no public delegation presentations submitted to trustees at the public
delegation meetings on 2017 May 2 and 2017 May 3 regarding EPAR 02.
c. Public Delegation Presentations Report –EPAR 01
K. Bushell referred to the report (item #13.c) provided to Trustees in advance of the meeting.
Feedback received during the Public Delegation Meetings on 2017 May 2 and May 3 regarding the
Final Senior Administration Report for EPAR 01 were included in the report. A total of 57 public
delegation presentations were submitted to trustees during the public delegation meetings.
d. Final Senior Administration Report – EPAR 02
K. Bushell presented for approval the recommendations of the Final Senior Administration Report
– EPAR 02 (item #13.d).
Appreciation was extended to the Fairmont P.S. and Tweedsmuir P.S. school communities for
their contributions to the EPAR process.
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Tisdale, seconded Trustee Todd and
CARRIED:
THAT Fairmont Public School, at 1040 Hamilton Road, London ON, close, effective
2019 June 30, and declared surplus, contingent upon Ministry of Education
approval of capital funding for the new Sout heast London Public School and the
addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir Public School.
2017 May 23…3
A poll vote was conducted.
POLL VOTE
YEA: Trustees J. Bennett, R. Campbell, C. Goodall, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, B. McKinnon, A. Morell, S.
Polhill, M. Reid, P. Schuyler, R. Tisdale, J. Todd.
NAY: NIL
Student Trustees: A. Pucchio – YEA, S. Suvajac - YEA
The following recommendations were moved by Trustee Tisdale, seconded Trustee Bennett and
CARRIED:
THAT the Tweedsmuir Public School junior kindergarten to grade 8 new
attendance area be approved, as per Figure 01, effective 2019 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast
London Public School and the addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir Public
School.
THAT the students residing in the proposed Tweedsmuir Public School attendance
area be accommodated at Tweedsmuir Public School, effective 2019 July 01,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Southeast London Public School and the addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir
Public School.
THAT an addition, renovations and program enhancements be constructed at
Tweedsmuir Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
capital funding.
THAT a Design Committee be established to provide input regarding the design of
an addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir Public School, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding.
THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to renaming
Tweedsmuir Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
capital funding.
e. Final Senior Administration Report – EPAR 01
K. Bushell presented for approval the recommendations of the Final Senior Administration Report
EPAR 01 (item #13.e).
Questions of clarification were answered by Administration.
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Tisdale, seconded by Trustee Hart and
CARRIED:
THAT Sparta Public School, located at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas, close
effective 2018 June 30.
Trustee Hart extended appreciation for the new EPAR process and further noted the value of the
school tours. Trustee Hart also acknowledged concerns regarding the impact of the Ministry
funding formula on rural schools.
Trustees shared their opinion regarding the closing of Sparta P.S. noting the factors contributing
to their decisions.
A poll vote was conducted.
2017 May 23…4
POLL VOTE
YEA: Trustees J. Bennett, R. Campbell, C. Goodall, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, B. McKinnon, A. Morell, S.
Polhill, M. Reid, P. Schuyler, R. Tisdale, J. Todd.
NAY: NIL
Student Trustees: A. Pucchio – YEA, S. Suvajac - YEA
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Hart, seconded by Trustee Polhill and
CARRIED:
THAT New Sarum Public School, located at 9473 Belmont Road, St. Thomas, close
effective 2020 June 30, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital
funding for the new Belmont Public School and the new Southeast St. Thomas
Public School.
Trustee Goodall spoke to the recommendation thanking the community, s enior administration,
teachers and principals for their input during the EPAR process. While acknowledging the
importance of being fiscally responsibility and recognizing the need for a new school in Belmont
Trustee Goodall did not support the closure of New Sarum P.S. or Springfield P.S. Factors
contributing to his decision were shared.
Trustee Todd spoke to the dedication of the New Sarum P.S. community as well as the strength of
the students with regards to attendance and EQAO. His rationale for supporting the
recommendation was shared.
Trustees shared their opinion regarding the closing of New Sarum P.S. noting the factors
contributing to their decisions.
A poll vote was conducted.
POLL VOTE
YAY – Trustees J. Bennett, R. Campbell, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, M. Reid, R. Tisdale, J. Todd
NAY – Trustees C. Goodall, B. McKinnon, A. Morell, S. Polhill, P. Schuyler
Student Trustees: A. Pucchio – NAY, S. Suvajac - YEA
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Jaffe, seconded by Tisdale Trustee and
CARRIED:
THAT South Dorchester Public School, located at 48614 Crossley Hunter Line,
Belmont, close effective 2020 June 30 and be declared surplus, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public
School.
Trustee Jaffe spoke to the noting the community support for the closure of South Dorchester P.S.
and the building of a new school in Belmont.
A poll vote was conducted.
POLL VOTE
YEA: Trustees J. Bennett, R. Campbell, C. Goodall, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, B. McKinnon, A. Morell, S.
Polhill, M. Reid, P. Schuyler, R. Tisdale, J. Todd.
NAY: NIL
Student Trustees: A. Pucchio – YEA, S. Suvajac - YEA
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Tisdale, seconded Trustee Hart and
CARRIED:
2017 May 23…5
THAT Springfield Public School, located at 51336 Ron McNeil Line, Springfield,
close effective 2020 June 30 and be declared surplus, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
Trustees Tisdale and Hart spoke to the recommendation highlighting how the programming
benefits a new school will offer factored into their support of the recommendation.
Trustee Goodall and Todd shared their rationale for not supporting the recommendation.
Trustees shared their opinion regarding the closing of Springfield P.S. noting the factors
contributing to their decisions.
POLL VOTE
YEA: Trustees J. Bennett, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, B. McKinnon, S. Polhill, M. Reid, R. Tisdale
NAY: Trustees R. Campbell, C. Goodall, A. Morell, P. Schuyler, J. Skinner, J. Todd
Student Trustees: A. Pucchio – YEA, S. Suvajac - YEA
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Tisdale, seconded by Trustee Polhill.
THAT Westminster Central Public School, located at 2835 Westminster Driv e,
London, close effective 2020 June 30 and be declared surplus, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public
School.
A poll vote was conducted.
POLL VOTE
YEA: Trustees J. Bennett, R. Campbell, C. Goodall, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, K. Skinner, B. McKinnon, A.
Morell, S. Polhill, M. Reid, P. Schuyler, R. Tisdale, J. Todd.
NAY: NIL
Student Trustees: A. Pucchio – YEA, S. Suvajac - YEA
The following recommendations were moved by Trustee Jaffe, seconded by Trustee Bennett and
CARRIED:
THAT the Port Stanley Public School new attendance area be approved as per
Figure 03, effective 2018 July 01.
THAT an addition and renovations be constructed for student accommodation and
program enhancement at Port Stanley Public School.
THAT an Attendance Area Review be conducted during the 2017 -18 school year,
for the creation of a French Immersion Public School located at Sparta Public
School, effective 2018 July 01.
THAT the grade 7 and 8 French Immersion and Extended French Immersion
program be relocated from Port Stanley Public School to either Sparta Public
School or Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School, effective 2018
July 01, as per the decision of the Board following a French Immersion Attendance
Area Review.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations, by email,
of the potential co-build opportunity at Port Stanley Public School.
THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to renaming Port
Stanley Public School.
2017 May 23…6
In response to a question Administration clarified New Sarum P.S. was not declared surplus due to
its potential for French Immersion in the future.
The following recommendations were moved by Trustee Tisdale, seconded by Trustee Hart and
CARRIED:
THAT a new junior kindergarten to grade 8 elementary school be constructed in
the village of Belmont, opening 2020 September 01, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding.
THAT the new Belmont Public School attendance area be approved as per Figure
01, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
capital funding for the new Belmont Public School
THAT the River Heights Public School junior kindergarten to grade 3 attendance
area be approved as per Figure 02, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry
of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT the Northdale Central Public School grade 4 to grade 8 attendance area be
approved as per Figure 02, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT a renovation for program enhancements be completed at Northdale Central
Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of c apital funding
for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT the Davenport Public School grade 7 students and siblings, residing in the
area to be accommodated at the new Belmont Public School and registered as of
2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020-21 school
year, to remain at Davenport Public School, with transportation if eligible,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Belmont Public School.
THAT the Northdale Central Public School grade 7 students and siblings, residing
in the area designated to the new Belmont Public School and registered as of 2020
March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020-21 school year, to
remain at Northdale Central Public School, with transport ation if eligible.
THAT the Summers’ Corners Public School grade 7 students and siblings, residing
in the area to be accommodated at the new Belmont Public School and registered
as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020 -21
school year, to remain at Summers’ Corners Public School, with transportation if
eligible, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the
new Belmont Public School.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify the listed Community Organizations by
email of the potential co-build opportunity at the new Belmont Public School,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Belmont Public School.
THAT a Design Committee be established to provide input regard ing the design of
the new Belmont Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to naming the new
2017 May 23…7
Belmont Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital
funding for the new Belmont Public School.
The following recommendations were moved by Trustee Todd, seconded by Trustee Jaffe and
CARRIED:
THAT Davenport Public School configuration change to a grade 4 to grade 8
elementary school, effective 2018 July 01.
THAT the Davenport Public School grade 4 to grade 8 attendance area be approved
as per Figure 04, effective 2018 July 01.
THAT the McGregor Public School configuration change to a junior kindergarten to
grade 3 elementary school, as of 2018 July 01.
THAT the McGregor Public School junior kindergarten to grade 3 attendance area
be approved as per Figure 04, effective 2018 July 01.
THAT renovations for program enhancements be completed at McGregor Public
School.
THAT renovations for program enhancements be completed at Davenport Public
School.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations by email,
of the potential collaboration opportunity at McGregor Public School.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations by email,
of the potential collaboration opportunity at Davenport Public School.
THAT the Summers’ Corners Public School junior kindergarten to grade 8
attendance area be approved as per Figure 05, effective 2020 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public
School.
THAT renovations for program enhancements be completed at Summers’ Corners
Public School.
The following recommendations were moved by Trustee Jaffe, seconded by Trustee Polhill and
CARRIED:
THAT a new junior kindergarten to grade 8 elementary school be constructed in
the southeastern area of the City of St. Thomas, opening 2020 September 01,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
THAT the new junior kindergarten to grade 8 Southeast St. Thomas Public School
attendance area be approved as per Figure 06, effective 2020 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding f or the new Southeast St.
Thomas Public School.
THAT a portion of the Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone be permanently
accommodated at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School as of 2020 July 01,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
2017 May 23…8
THAT the Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone grade 7 students and siblings
residing in the area to be accommodated at the new Southeast St. Thomas Pub lic
School and registered as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting
option” for the 2020-21 school year, to remain at Port Stanley Public School, with
transportation if eligible, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital
funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
THAT the Mitchell Hepburn Public School junior kindergarten to grade 8
attendance area be approved as per Figure 07 effective 2020 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding f or the new Southeast St.
Thomas Public School.
THAT the Mitchell Hepburn Public School grade 7 students and siblings residing in
the area to be accommodated at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School and
registered as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the
2020-21 school year, to remain at Mitchell Hepburn Public School, with
transportation if eligible, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital
funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
THAT a portion of the Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone be permanently
accommodated at Mitchell Hepburn Public School as of 2020 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St.
Thomas Public School.
THAT the Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone grade 7 students and siblings
residing in the area to be accommodated at Mitchell Hepburn Public School and
registered as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the
2020-21 school year, to remain at Port Stanley Public School, with transportation if
eligible, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the
new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations by email
of the potential co-build opportunity at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the
new Southeast St. Thomas Pubic School.
THAT a Design Committee be established to provide input regarding the design of
the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School.
THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to the naming of
the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School.
Administration answered a question of clar ification regarding capacity issues at Mitchell Hepburn
P.S., and how those will be addressed.
f. Implementation Plan for AEDs in Schools
Superintendent L. Griffith-Jones presented for approval the installation of AEDs in all schools over
a 3-5 year period looking at approximately 40 schools per year. The Board will seek
funding/donations from community groups/municipalities for the purchase of Board approved
AEDs (item #13.f).
2017 May 23…9
The new AED Policy and Procedure is currently posted for Public input and will close on May 29.
It was clarified that the original Trustee budget initiative would be replaced with a budget initiative
of $20,000 annually for the maintenance of AEDs.
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Skinner, seconded by Trustee Bennett and
CARRIED:
THAT the Board of Trustees approve the implementation plan for the installation of
AEDs in all schools in TVDSB beginning in September 2017.
THAT the Board of Trustees include in the budget initiative to provide funds in the
amount of $20,000 annually to support the maintenance of AEDs.
g. Secondary English as a Second Language (ESL)/English Literacy Development (ELD)
Staffing
Superintendent R. Culhane presented, for approval, the Secondary English as a Second
Language (ESL)/English Literacy Development (ELD) Staffing proposal. Salary costs and
justification for increasing the staffing allocation for ESL and ELD Staffing was described (item
#13.g).
Administration responded to questions of clarification regarding GSN funding and the urgency for
this staffing allocation.
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Tisdale, seconded by Trustee Bennett and
CARRIED:
THAT the Board approve, in advance of the budget approval in June 2017, the
hiring of 3.0 FTE permanent Secondary English as a Second Language
(ESL)/English Literacy Development (ELD) teachers effective September 1, 2017.
h. Additional Vision Staffing for 2017-2018
Superintendent S. Builder presented for approval the addition of Vision Staffing for 2017-2018, in
advance of the budget approval process (item #13.h). The rationale was described.
Administration responded to questions of clarification regarding the request and the required
staffing.
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Bennett, seconded by Trustee Tisdale and
CARRIED:
THAT the Board approve, in advance of the budget approval in June 2017, the
addition and hiring of 1.4 FTE Vision Resource Teachers and 3.0 FTE Educational
Assistants (Transcribers) to the Proposed Special Education Budget for 2017-2018.
i. Additional Learning Supervisor – Special Education
Superintendent S. Builder presented for approval the addition of a Learning Supervisor – Special
Education in advance of the budget approval process (item #13.i). The budget initiative and
rational was described. In response to a question, it was noted the Special Education deficit for
2017-2018 is slightly higher than the current year.
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Jaffe, seconded by Trustee Todd and
CARRIED:
2017 May 23…10
THAT the Board approve, in advance of the budget approval in June 2017, the
hiring of an additional 1.0 FTE Learning Supervisor – Special Education, effective
September 1, 2017.
14. REPORTS FROM BOARD COMMITTEES
a. First Nations Advisory Committee Report, 2017 April 18
Trustee Schuyler referred to the written report of the First Nations Advisory Committee (item 14.a)
provided to the Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations.
b. Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee, 2017 April 18
Trustee Todd referred to the written report of the Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee (item
14.b) provided to Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations.
c. Chair’s Committee, 2017 April 25
Trustee Morell referred to the written report of the Chair’s Committee (Item 14.c) provided to
Trustees in advance of the meeting.
The following recommendations were moved by Trustee Morell, seconded by Trustee Bennett and
CARRIED:
THAT Trustee R. Tisdale be appointed as the voting delegate at the OPSBA Annual
General Meeting.
That Trustee M. Reid be appointed as the alternate voting delegate at the OPSBA
Annual General Meeting.
d. Special Education Advisory Committee Report, 2017 April 4
Trustee Bennett referred to the written report of the Special Education Advisory Committee (Item
14.d) provided to the Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations.
e. Audit Committee, 2017 May 9
Trustee Tisdale referred to the written report of the Audit Committee (item 14.e) provided to the
Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations.
f. Committee of the Whole, In-Camera, 2017 May 9
Trustee Morell advised the Committee of the Whole met in-camera from 5:47 p.m. to 5:53 p.m.
The committee discussed confidential personal matters. No conflicts of interest were declared.
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Morell, seconded by Trustee Hart and
CARRIED:
THAT the motions approved at the in-camera session of 2017 May 9 regarding
personal matters be approved.
g. Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee, 2017 May 9
Trustee Todd referred to the written report of the Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee (item
14.g) provided to the Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations.
h. Chair’s Committee, 2017 May 16
Trustee Morell referred to the written report of the Chair’s Committee (Item 14.h) provided to
Trustees in advance of the meeting.
The following recommendation as moved by Trustee Morell , seconded by Trustee Todd and
CARRIED:
2017 May 23…11
THAT Trustees J. Bennett, R. Tisdale and M. Reid be appointed to sit on the Bylaw
Ad Hoc Committee.
i. Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee, 2017 May 16
Trustee Goodall referred to the written report of the Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee
(item 14.i) provided to the Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations.
j. Committee of the Whole, In-Camera Report, 2017 May 16
Trustee Morell advised the Committee of the Whole met in-camera from 5:52 p.m. to 6:09 p.m.
The committee discussed confidential negotiation and personal matters. No conflicts of interest
were declared.
The following recommendation was moved by Trustee Morell, seconded by Trustee Bennett and
CARRIED:
THAT the motions approved at the in-camera session of 2017 May 16 regarding
personal matters be approved.
k. Committee of the Whole, In-Camera Report, 2017 May 23
Trustee Morell advised the Committee of the Whole met in-camera from 5:06 p.m. to 5:49 p.m.
The committee discussed confidential negotiation, legal, property and personal matters. No
conflicts of interest were declared. There were no recommendations.
l. Final Report of the Trustees Forums Ad Hoc Committee
Trustee Morell referred to the Final Report of the Trustees Forums Ad Hoc Committee (item 14.l)
provided to the Trustees in advance of the meeting.
The following recommendations were moved by Trustee Morell, seconded by Trustee Bennett and
CARRIED:
THAT, at minimum, one Trustee Forum be held annually throughout TVDSB.
THAT the Trustee Forums Ad Hoc Committee be disbanded.
Appreciation was extended to Trustee Morell for her initiative.
15. TRUSTEE UPDATES FROM EXTERNAL COMMITTEES
a. Ontario Public School Boards’ Association (OPSBA) Update
Trustee Tisdale advised the next Ontario Public School Boards’ Association Western Region
meeting is 2017 June 8. The AGM is scheduled to take place 2017 June 9-11.
16. COMMUNICATIONS
a. Middlesex London Health Unit - provided for information
Administration clarified the requirement of parents to actively consent for their child to participate in
dental screening.
b. Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula – provided for information.
c. Office of the Prime Minister – provided for information.
17. NOTICE OF MOTION – none
18. MOTION – NOTICE OF WHICH HAS BEEN GIVEN – none
19. ADDITIONAL ITEMS – none
2017 May 23…12
20. QUESTIONS/COMMENTS BY MEMBERS
Appreciation was extended to Chair Reid for his leadership in chairing the evening’s meeting.
21. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:46 p.m. on motion of Trustee Jaffe, seconded by Trustee Todd.
Confirmed:
Chairperson
2017 May 23…13
SUMMARY OF APPROVED RECOMMENDATIONS OF 2017 MAY 23
THAT Fairmont Public School, at 1040 Hamilton Road, London ON, close, effective
2019 June 30, and declared surplus, contingent upon Ministry of Education
approval of capital funding for the new Southeast London Public School and the
addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir Publi c School
THAT the Tweedsmuir Public School junior kindergarten to grade 8 new
attendance area be approved, as per Figure 01, effective 2019 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast
London Public School and the addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir Public
School.
THAT the students residing in the proposed Tweedsmuir Public School attendance
area be accommodated at Tweedsmuir Public School, effective 2019 July 01,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Southeast London Public School and the addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir
Public School.
THAT an addition, renovations and program enhancements be constructed at
Tweedsmuir Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
capital funding.
THAT a Design Committee be established to provide input regarding the design of
an addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir Public School, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding.
THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to renaming
Tweedsmuir Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
capital funding.
THAT Sparta Public School, located at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas, close
effective 2018 June 30.
THAT New Sarum Public School, located at 9473 Belmont Road, St. Thomas, close
effective 2020 June 30, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital
funding for the new Belmont Public School and the new Southeast St. Thomas
Public School.
THAT South Dorchester Public School, located at 48614 Crossley Hunter Line,
Belmont, close effective 2020 June 30 and be declared surplus, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public
School.
THAT Springfield Public School, located at 51336 Ron McNeil Line, Springfield,
close effective 2020 June 30 and be declared surplus, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT Westminster Central Public School, located at 2835 Westminster Drive,
London, close effective 2020 June 30 and be declared surplus, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public
School.
THAT the Port Stanley Public School new attendance a rea be approved as per
Figure 03, effective 2018 July 01.
2017 May 23…14
THAT an addition and renovations be constructed for student accommodation and
program enhancement at Port Stanley Public School.
THAT an Attendance Area Review be conducted during the 2017 -18 school year,
for the creation of a French Immersion Public School located at Sparta Public
School, effective 2018 July 01.
THAT the grade 7 and 8 French Immersion and Extended French Immersion
program be relocated from Port Stanley Public School to either Spa rta Public
School or Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School, effective 2018
July 01, as per the decision of the Board following a French Immersion Attendance
Area Review.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations, by email,
of the potential co-build opportunity at Port Stanley Public School.
THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to renaming Port
Stanley Public School.
THAT a new junior kindergarten to grade 8 elementary school be construct ed in
the village of Belmont, opening 2020 September 01, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding.
THAT the new Belmont Public School attendance area be approved as per Figure
01, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry o f Education approval of
capital funding for the new Belmont Public School
THAT the River Heights Public School junior kindergarten to grade 3 attendance
area be approved as per Figure 02, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry
of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT the Northdale Central Public School grade 4 to grade 8 attendance area be
approved as per Figure 02, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT a renovation for program enhancements be completed at Northdale Central
Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding
for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT the Davenport Public School grade 7 students and siblings, residing in the
area to be accommodated at the new Belmont Public School and registered as of
2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020 -21 school
year, to remain at Davenport Public School, with transportation if eligible,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Belmont Public School.
THAT the Northdale Central Public School grade 7 students and siblings, residing
in the area designated to the new Belmont Public School and registered as of 2020
March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020-21 school year, to
remain at Northdale Central Public School, with transportation if eligible.
THAT the Summers’ Corners Public School grade 7 students and siblings, residing
in the area to be accommodated at the new Belmont Publi c School and registered
as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020 -21
school year, to remain at Summers’ Corners Public School, with transportation if
2017 May 23…15
eligible, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital fundin g for the
new Belmont Public School.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify the listed Community Organizations by
email of the potential co-build opportunity at the new Belmont Public School,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital fundi ng for the new
Belmont Public School.
THAT a Design Committee be established to provide input regarding the design of
the new Belmont Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to naming the new
Belmont Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital
funding for the new Belmont Public School.
THAT Davenport Public School configuration change to a g rade 4 to grade 8
elementary school, effective 2018 July 01.
THAT the Davenport Public School grade 4 to grade 8 attendance area be approved
as per Figure 04, effective 2018 July 01.
THAT the McGregor Public School configuration change to a junior kindergarten to
grade 3 elementary school, as of 2018 July 01.
THAT the McGregor Public School junior kindergarten to grade 3 attendance area
be approved as per Figure 04, effective 2018 July 01.
THAT renovations for program enhancements be completed at McGregor Public
School.
THAT renovations for program enhancements be completed at Davenport Public
School.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations by email,
of the potential collaboration opportunity at McGregor Public School.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations by email,
of the potential collaboration opportunity at Davenport Public School.
THAT the Summers’ Corners Public School junior kindergarten to grade 8
attendance area be approved as per Figure 05, effective 2020 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public
School.
THAT renovations for program enhancements be completed at Summers’ Corners
Public School.
THAT a new junior kindergarten to grade 8 elementary school be constructed in
the southeastern area of the City of St. Thomas, opening 2020 September 01,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
THAT the new junior kindergarten to grade 8 Southeast St. Thomas Public School
attendance area be approved as per Figure 06, effective 2020 July 01, contingent
2017 May 23…16
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St.
Thomas Public School.
THAT a portion of the Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone be permanently
accommodated at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School as of 2020 July 01,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
THAT the Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone grade 7 students and siblings
residing in the area to be accommodated at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School and registered as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting
option” for the 2020-21 school year, to remain at Port Stanley Public School, with
transportation if eligible, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital
funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
THAT the Mitchell Hepburn Public School junior kindergarten to grade 8
attendance area be approved as per Figure 07 effective 2020 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St.
Thomas Public School.
THAT the Mitchell Hepburn Public School grade 7 stu dents and siblings residing in
the area to be accommodated at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School and
registered as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the
2020-21 school year, to remain at Mitchell Hepburn Public School, w ith
transportation if eligible, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital
funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
THAT a portion of the Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone be permanently
accommodated at Mitchell Hepburn Public School as of 2020 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St.
Thomas Public School.
THAT the Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone grade 7 students and siblings
residing in the area to be accommodated at Mitchell Hepburn Public School and
registered as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the
2020-21 school year, to remain at Port Stanley Public School, with transportation if
eligible, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the
new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations by email
of the potential co-build opportunity at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the
new Southeast St. Thomas Pubic School.
THAT a Design Committee be established to provide input regarding the design of
the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School.
THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to the naming of
the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School.
2017 May 23…17
THAT the Board of Trustees approve the implementation plan for the installation of
AEDs in all schools in TVDSB beginning in September 2017.
THAT the Board of Trustees include in the budget initiative to provide funds in the
amount of $20,000 annually to support the maintenance of AEDs.
THAT the Board approve, in advance of the budget approval in June 2017, the
hiring of 3.0 FTE permanent Secondary English as a Second Language
(ESL)/English Literacy Development (ELD) teachers effective September 1, 2017
THAT the Board approve, in advance of the budget approval in June 2017, the
addition and hiring of 1.4 FTE Vision Resource Teachers and 3.0 FTE Educational
Assistants (Transcribers) to the Proposed Special Education Budget for 2017 -2018.
THAT the Board approve, in advance of the budget approval in June 2017, the
hiring of an additional 1.0 FTE Learning Supervisor – Special Education, effective
September 1, 2017.
THAT Trustee R. Tisdale be appointed as the voting delegate at the OPSBA Annual
General Meeting.
That Trustee M. Reid be appointed as the alternate voting delegate at the OPSBA
Annual General Meeting.
THAT the motions approved at the in-camera session of 2017 May 9 regarding
personal matters be approved.
THAT Trustees J. Bennett, R. Tisdale and M. Reid be appointed to sit on the Bylaw
Ad Hoc Committee.
THAT the motions approved at the in-camera session of 2017 May 16 regarding
personal matters be approved.
THAT, at minimum, one Trustee Forum be held annually throughout TVDSB.
THAT the Trustee Forums Ad Hoc Committee be disbanded.
2017 May 23 5
OFFICIAL RECORD
We regret to record the death of Xavier Garrett, a student at Algonquin Public
School on May 13, 2017.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Date of
Meeting:
2017 May 23
Item #:
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐ IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐ Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☐ Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐ Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF REPORT: 2016‐2017 THAMES VALLEY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENROLMENT VERSUS CAPACITY SUMMARY
PRESENTED BY: Kevin Bushell, Executive Officer Facility Services and Capital Planning
PRESENTED FOR: ☐ Approval ☒ Information ☐ Advice
Recommendation(s):
Purpose: To provide a summary report indicating the 2016‐2017 On‐The‐Ground (OTG) Capacity of schools versus
the 2015 October 31 Full‐Time Equivalent (FTE) count.
Content: Analysis of 2016‐2017 Enrolment Versus Capacity Report compared to 2015‐2016:
1. Operating 2 less school.
2. Number of schools at 100% capacity or greater remained stable in both the elementary panel at
32 and in the secondary panel by at 5.
3. Number of schools with less than 100% capacity decreased by 2 to 120.
4. In schools with less than 100% capacity there were 14,512 excess pupil places located in both
panels which equates to a decrease of 1,421.
Excess capacity in elementary decreased by 14.82% or 1,458.98 pupil places
Excess capacity in secondary increase by 0.61% or 37.09 pupil places
Notes:
1. 2016‐2017 revisions to the School Facility Information System (with respect to the OTG capacity
and the 2015 October 31 FTE count) have been submitted but not yet validated by the Ministry of
Education.
2. Lorne Avenue PS and West Elgin Senior PS were closed as of 2016 June 30. Closed schools have no
enrolment therefore have not been included in this report.
3. Continuing and Alternative Education facilities are classified as “Other” by the Ministry of
Education and loaded at zero, therefore, they have not been included in this report.
Cost/Savings: N/A
Timeline: N/A
Communications: N/A
Appendices: Appendix A: 2016‐2017 All Schools –Alphabetical
Appendix B: 2016‐2017 Schools at 100% Capacity or Greater
Appendix C: 2016‐2017 Schools Less Than 100% Capacity
Appendix D: 2015‐2016 All Schools – Alphabetical (for comparison)
Appendix E: 2015‐2016 Schools at 100% Capacity or Greater (for comparison)
Appendix F: 2015‐2016 Schools Less Than 100% Capacity (for comparison)
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☐ Putting students first. ☐ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☐ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☐ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☒ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016-2017
All Schools (Alphabetical)
Using: 2016‐2017 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2017 February 03)
2016 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Elementary Panel
5 1010 A. J. Baker PS KINTORE 141 95 46 148.42%
7861 1015 Aberdeen PS LONDON 211 378 ‐167 55.82%
22 1020 Adelaide ‐ W.G. MacDonald PS STRATHROY 174 256 ‐82 67.97%
38 1025 Aldborough PS RODNEY 303 389 ‐86 77.89%
53 1030 Algonquin PS WOODSTOCK 558 643 ‐85 86.78%
55 1999 Annandale PS TILLSONBURG 506 580 ‐74 87.24%
7863 1035 Arthur Ford PS LONDON 369 320 49 115.31%
7914 1040 Arthur Stringer PS LONDON 244 381 ‐137 64.04%
7864 1045 Ashley Oaks PS LONDON 558.42 577 ‐18.58 96.78%
11203 1925 Blenheim District PS DRUMBO 299 366 ‐67 81.69%
7866 1070 Bonaventure Meadows PS LONDON 410 518 ‐108 79.15%
7869 1085 Byron Northview PS LONDON 536 452 84 118.58%
7867 1090 Byron Somerset PS LONDON 284 409 ‐125 69.44%
7870 1095 Byron Southwood PS LONDON 538 570 ‐32 94.39%
7871 1100 C. C. Carrothers PS LONDON 378.67 492 ‐113.33 76.97%
322 1115 Caradoc North PS STRATHROY 182 216 ‐34 84.26%
321 1105 Caradoc PS MOUNT BRYDGES 330 424 ‐94 77.83%
1381 1120 Centennial Central PS ARVA 413.45 323 90.45 128.00%
408 1125 Central PS WOODSTOCK 240 377 ‐137 63.66%
7873 1135 Chippewa PS LONDON 433 591 ‐158 73.27%
7874 1140 Clara Brenton PS LONDON 664 564 100 117.73%
7875 1145 Cleardale PS LONDON 435 550 ‐115 79.09%
5882 1160 Davenport PS AYLMER 309 423 ‐114 73.05%
569 1165 Delaware Central PS DELAWARE 132 259 ‐127 50.97%
654 1175 Dunwich‐Dutton PS DUTTON 324 343 ‐19 94.46%
7920 1505 Eagle Heights PS LONDON 848.33 680 168.33 124.75%
7876 1180 Ealing PS LONDON 190 343 ‐153 55.39%
7865 1065 East Carling PS LONDON 416 461 ‐45 90.24%
680 1190 East Oxford Central PS WOODSTOCK 263 317 ‐54 82.97%
683 1185 East Williams Memorial PS AILSA CRAIG 212 317 ‐105 66.88%
687 1195 Eastdale PS WOODSTOCK 272.67 300 ‐27.33 90.89%
711 1205 Ekcoe Central PS GLENCOE 344 352 ‐8 97.73%
716 1215 Elgin Court PS ST THOMAS 321 467 ‐146 68.74%
7877 1230 Emily Carr PS LONDON 753.5 639 114.5 117.92%
22459 1940 Emily Stowe PS NORWICH 537 599 ‐62 89.65%
7879 1245 Evelyn Harrison PS LONDON 318 427 ‐109 74.47%
7881 1250 F. D. Roosevelt PS LONDON 407.4 442 ‐34.6 92.17%
7880 1255 Fairmont PS LONDON 272 355 ‐83 76.62%
5862 1260 Forest Park PS ST THOMAS 406.33 530 ‐123.67 76.67%
7882 1265 Glen Cairn PS LONDON 551.63 685 ‐133.37 80.53%
1021 1270 Harrisfield PS INGERSOLL 499 531 ‐32 93.97%
1059 1275 Hickson Central PS HICKSON 442 481 ‐39 91.89%
7884 1285 Hillcrest PS LONDON 302 400 ‐98 75.50%
1148 1300 Innerkip Central PS INNERKIP 194 279 ‐85 69.53%
2190 1641 J.S. Buchanan FI PS STRATHROY 266 363 ‐97 73.28%
7886 1305 Jack Chambers PS LONDON 781 697 84 112.05%
7878 1310 Jeanne Sauvé FI PS LONDON 432 466 ‐34 92.70%
7887 1320 John Dearness PS LONDON 242 248 ‐6 97.58%
7910 1315 John P. Robarts PS LONDON 529 677 ‐148 78.14%
11205 1905 John Wise PS ST THOMAS 576.84 625 ‐48.16 92.29%
5877 1200 June Rose Callwood PS ST THOMAS 433 375 58 115.47%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016‐17 All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Page 1 of 4
APPENDIX A
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
7888 1325 Kensal Park FI PS LONDON 829.67 737 92.67 112.57%
7889 1330 Knollwood Park PS LONDON 228.34 447 ‐218.66 51.08%
7860 1005 Lambeth PS LONDON 621 628 ‐7 98.89%
13969 1930 Laurie Hawkins PS INGERSOLL 595 671 ‐76 88.67%
7890 1335
Lester B Pearson
School for the Arts LONDON 278 414 ‐136 67.15%
1376 1345 Locke's PS ST THOMAS 584 576 8 101.39%
7891 1355 Lord Elgin PS LONDON 324.55 446 ‐121.45 72.77%
7892 1350 Lord Nelson PS LONDON 546 619 ‐73 88.21%
7894 1360 Lord Roberts FI PS LONDON 393 306 87 128.43%
7942 1296 Louise Arbour FI PS LONDON 622 783 ‐161 79.44%
18630 1935 Mary Wright PS STRATHROY 500 534 ‐34 93.63%
7897 1400 Masonville PS LONDON 531 363 168 146.28%
1500 1410 McGillivray Central PS AILSA CRAIG 118 164 ‐46 71.95%
558 1405 McGregor PS AYLMER 353 530 ‐177 66.60%
11013 1900 Mitchell Hepburn PS ST THOMAS 756.5 678 78.5 111.58%
1571 1420 Mosa Central PS GLENCOE 168 210 ‐42 80.00%
7898 1425 Mountsfield PS LONDON 485 504 ‐19 96.23%
2578 1435 New Sarum PS ST THOMAS 249 257 ‐8 96.89%
7899 1440 Nicholas Wilson PS LONDON 228 420 ‐192 54.29%
5809 1450 North Meadows PS STRATHROY 427 518 ‐91 82.43%
7900 1455 Northbrae PS LONDON 381.5 380 1.5 100.39%
1664 1460 Northdale Central PS DORCHESTER 410 446 ‐36 91.93%
1667 1470 Northdale PS WOODSTOCK 345 328 17 105.18%
7902 1475 Northridge PS LONDON 805 593 212 135.75%
1703 1485 Oliver Stephens PS WOODSTOCK 239 366 ‐127 65.30%
7903 1490 Orchard Park PS LONDON 232 245 ‐13 94.69%
1738 1500 Oxbow PS ILDERTON 558 501 57 111.38%
1104 1290 P. E. Trudeau FI PS ST THOMAS 578 530 48 109.06%
1758 1510 Parkhill‐West Williams PS PARKHILL 220 236 ‐16 93.22%
1770 1515 Parkview PS KOMOKA 609 602 7 101.16%
1826 1520 Plattsville & District PS PLATTSVILLE 242 317 ‐75 76.34%
1840 1530 Port Burwell PS PORT BURWELL 175 248 ‐73 70.56%
1847 1535 Port Stanley PS PORT STANLEY 254 317 ‐63 80.13%
7921 1540 Prince Charles PS LONDON 426 602 ‐176 70.76%
7922 1555 Princess Anne FI PS LONDON 489 493 ‐4 99.19%
7923 1565 Princess Elizabeth PS LONDON 730 746 ‐16 97.86%
7924 1575 Rick Hansen PS LONDON 385 484 ‐99 79.55%
1992 1580 River Heights PS DORCHESTER 342 461 ‐119 74.19%
7925 1585 Riverside PS LONDON 438 412 26 106.31%
1137 1281 Roch Carrier FI PS WOODSTOCK 429 282 147 152.13%
1877 1550 Royal Roads PS INGERSOLL 400.47 400 0.47 100.12%
7926 1595 Ryerson PS LONDON 366.53 438 ‐71.47 83.68%
7872 1620 Sir Georges Etienne Cartier PS LONDON 329 251 78 131.08%
7883 1615 Sir Isaac Brock PS LONDON 464.58 349 115.58 133.12%
7904 1625 Sir John A. Macdonald PS LONDON 398.33 579 ‐180.67 68.80%
600 1630 South Dorchester PS BELMONT 205 190 15 107.89%
2195 1635 South Ridge PS TILLSONBURG 359 400 ‐41 89.75%
2193 1645 Southside PS WOODSTOCK 283 147 136 192.52%
2194 1650 Southwold PS ST THOMAS 664 654 10 101.53%
2577 1655 Sparta PS ST THOMAS 244 305 ‐61 80.00%
2201 1660 Springbank PS WOODSTOCK 504 366 138 137.70%
2203 1665 Springfield PS SPRINGFIELD 164 268 ‐104 61.19%
7907 1670 St. George's PS LONDON 275.63 307 ‐31.37 89.78%
11217 1915 Stoney Creek PS LONDON 1007 629 378 160.10%
7908 1675 Stoneybrook PS LONDON 481 423 58 113.71%
2248 1680 Straffordville PS STRAFFORDVILLE 345 458 ‐113 75.33%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016‐17 All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Page 2 of 4
APPENDIX A
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
1429 1685 Summers' Corners PS AYLMER 427 585 ‐158 72.99%
2280 1695 Tavistock PS TAVISTOCK 278 397 ‐119 70.03%
7909 1700 Tecumseh PS LONDON 264 377 ‐113 70.03%
2292 1705 Thamesford PS THAMESFORD 309 320 ‐11 96.56%
7927 1715 Trafalgar PS LONDON 157 409 ‐252 38.39%
7928 1720 Tweedsmuir PS LONDON 356 458 ‐102 77.73%
7929 1725 University Heights PS LONDON 320 332 ‐12 96.39%
2358 1730 Valleyview Central PS ILDERTON 160 245 ‐85 65.31%
7930 1740 Victoria PS LONDON 237 331 ‐94 71.60%
7931 1750 W. Sherwood Fox PS LONDON 430.22 464 ‐33.78 92.72%
11204 1920 West Nissouri PS THORNDALE 384.6 392 ‐7.4 98.11%
7932 1766 West Oaks FI PS LONDON 337 432 ‐95 78.01%
14493 1820 Westfield PS TILLSONBURG 601 602 ‐1 99.83%
7933 1775 Westminster Central PS LONDON 96 302 ‐206 31.79%
7934 1780 Westmount PS LONDON 612 680 ‐68 90.00%
7911 1785 White Oaks PS LONDON 736 829 ‐93 88.78%
11104 1910 Wilberforce PS LUCAN 528 461 67 114.53%
7912 1790 Wilfrid Jury PS LONDON 656.45 780 ‐123.55 84.16%
7913 1795 Wilton Grove PS LONDON 380 461 ‐81 82.43%
550 1155 Winchester Street PS WOODSTOCK 321 393 ‐72 81.68%
7915 1800 Woodland Heights PS LONDON 560 630 ‐70 88.89%
7916 1805 Wortley Road PS LONDON 226.5 292 ‐65.5 77.57%
2589 1810 Zorra Highland Park PS EMBRO 259 397 ‐138 65.24%
Elementary Schools Subtotals 52,033.11 57,679 -5,645.89 90.21%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016‐17 All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Page 3 of 4
APPENDIX A
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Secondary Panel
7917 2190 A. B. Lucas SS LONDON 1459.37 1188 271.37 122.84%
5214 2030 Arthur Voaden SS ST THOMAS 459.97 1059 ‐599.03 43.43%
7944 2341 B. Davison SS LONDON 191.2 618 ‐426.8 30.94%
5270 2060 Central Elgin CI ST THOMAS 552.31 717 ‐164.69 77.03%
7936 2070 Central SS LONDON 973.92 786 187.92 123.91%
7918 2080 Clarke Road SS LONDON 1026.39 1545 ‐518.61 66.43%
5291 2090 College Avenue SS WOODSTOCK 792.8 1053 ‐260.2 75.29%
5325 2100 East Elgin SS AYLMER 1298.93 1164 134.93 111.59%
5391 2120 Glencoe DHS GLENCOE 180.4 543 ‐362.6 33.22%
5392 2130 Glendale HS TILLSONBURG 797.46 996 ‐198.54 80.07%
7935 2140 H.B. Beal SS LONDON 2024.12 1857 167.12 109.00%
5431 2150 Huron Park SS WOODSTOCK 704.95 969 ‐264.05 72.75%
5434 2160 Ingersoll District CI INGERSOLL 780.61 1191 ‐410.39 65.54%
7937 2290 London South CI LONDON 573.04 663 ‐89.96 86.43%
5309 2180 Lord Dorchester SS DORCHESTER 452.89 651 ‐198.11 69.57%
5517 2210 Medway HS ARVA 1159.5 1245 ‐85.5 93.13%
7938 2220 Montcalm SS LONDON 790.7 1251 ‐460.3 63.21%
5548 2230 North Middlesex DHS PARKHILL 140.94 426 ‐285.06 33.08%
7939 2250 Oakridge SS LONDON 1001 909 92 110.12%
5676 2260 Parkside CI ST THOMAS 901.1 972 ‐70.9 92.71%
7940 2280 Saunders SS LONDON 1540.75 1938 ‐397.25 79.50%
7941 2040 Sir Frederick Banting SS LONDON 1287.37 1308 ‐20.63 98.42%
7943 2170 Sir Wilfrid Laurier SS LONDON 1071.61 1110 ‐38.39 96.54%
10174 2320 Strathroy DCI STRATHROY 1116.33 1272 ‐155.67 87.76%
2450 2360 West Elgin SS WEST LORNE 299.29 642 ‐342.71 46.62%
7945 2370 Westminster SS LONDON 501.38 1119 ‐617.62 44.81%
5771 2390 Woodstock CI WOODSTOCK 530.59 690 ‐159.41 76.90%
Secondary Schools Subtotals 22,608.92 27,882 -5,273.08 81.09%
Number of Schools
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Numbers Rolled Up
Elementary Subtotals 130 52,033.11 57,679 ‐5,645.89 90.21%
Secondary Subtotals 27 22,608.92 27,882 ‐5,273.08 81.09%
ALL TVDSB TOTALS 157 74,642.03 85,561 -10,918.97 87.24%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016‐17 All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Page 4 of 4
APPENDIX A
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016-2017
Schools At 100% Capacity or Greater
Using: 2016‐2017 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2017 February 03)
2016 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Elementary Panel
2193 1645 Southside PS WOODSTOCK 283 147 136 192.52%
11217 1915 Stoney Creek PS LONDON 1007 629 378 160.10%
1137 1281 Roch Carrier FI PS WOODSTOCK 429 282 147 152.13%
5 1010 A. J. Baker PS KINTORE 141 95 46 148.42%
7897 1400 Masonville PS LONDON 531 363 168 146.28%
2201 1660 Springbank PS WOODSTOCK 504 366 138 137.70%
7902 1475 Northridge PS LONDON 805 593 212 135.75%
7883 1615 Sir Isaac Brock PS LONDON 464.58 349 115.58 133.12%
7872 1620 Sir Georges Etienne Cartier PS LONDON 329 251 78 131.08%
7894 1360 Lord Roberts FI PS LONDON 393 306 87 128.43%
1381 1120 Centennial Central PS ARVA 413.45 323 90.45 128.00%
7920 1505 Eagle Heights PS LONDON 848.33 680 168.33 124.75%
7869 1085 Byron Northview PS LONDON 536 452 84 118.58%
7877 1230 Emily Carr PS LONDON 753.5 639 114.5 117.92%
7874 1140 Clara Brenton PS LONDON 664 564 100 117.73%
5877 1200 June Rose Callwood PS ST THOMAS 433 375 58 115.47%
7863 1035 Arthur Ford PS LONDON 369 320 49 115.31%
11104 1910 Wilberforce PS LUCAN 528 461 67 114.53%
7908 1675 Stoneybrook PS LONDON 481 423 58 113.71%
7888 1325 Kensal Park FI PS LONDON 829.67 737 92.67 112.57%
7886 1305 Jack Chambers PS LONDON 781 697 84 112.05%
11013 1900 Mitchell Hepburn PS ST THOMAS 756.5 678 78.5 111.58%
1738 1500 Oxbow PS ILDERTON 558 501 57 111.38%
1104 1290 P. E. Trudeau FI PS ST THOMAS 578 530 48 109.06%
600 1630 South Dorchester PS BELMONT 205 190 15 107.89%
7925 1585 Riverside PS LONDON 438 412 26 106.31%
1667 1470 Northdale PS WOODSTOCK 345 328 17 105.18%
2194 1650 Southwold PS ST THOMAS 664 654 10 101.53%
1376 1345 Locke's PS ST THOMAS 584 576 8 101.39%
1770 1515 Parkview PS KOMOKA 609 602 7 101.16%
7900 1455 Northbrae PS LONDON 381.5 380 1.5 100.39%
1877 1550 Royal Roads PS INGERSOLL 400.47 400 0.47 100.12%
Elementary Schools Subtotals 17,043.00 14,303 2,740.00 119.16%
Secondary Panel
7936 2070 Central SS LONDON 973.92 786 187.92 123.91%
7917 2190 A. B. Lucas SS LONDON 1459.37 1188 271.37 122.84%
5325 2100 East Elgin SS AYLMER 1298.93 1164 134.93 111.59%
7939 2250 Oakridge SS LONDON 1001 909 92 110.12%
7935 2140 H.B. Beal SS LONDON 2024.12 1857 167.12 109.00%
Secondary Schools Subtotals 6,757.34 5,904 853.34 114.45%
Number of Schools
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Schools At 100% Capacity or Greater ‐ Numbers Rolled Up
Elementary Subtotals 32 17,043.00 14,303 2,740.00 119.16%
Secondary Subtotals 5 6,757.34 5,904 853.34 114.45%
ALL TVDSB TOTALS 37 23,800.34 20,207 3,593.34 117.78%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016‐17 Schools At 100% Capacity or Greater ‐ Page 1 of 1
APPENDIX B
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016-2017
Schools Less Than 100% Capacity
Using: 2016‐2017 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2017 February 03)
2016 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Elementary Panel
7933 1775 Westminster Central PS LONDON 96 302 ‐206 31.79%
7927 1715 Trafalgar PS LONDON 157 409 ‐252 38.39%
569 1165 Delaware Central PS DELAWARE 132 259 ‐127 50.97%
7889 1330 Knollwood Park PS LONDON 228.34 447 ‐218.66 51.08%
7899 1440 Nicholas Wilson PS LONDON 228 420 ‐192 54.29%
7876 1180 Ealing PS LONDON 190 343 ‐153 55.39%
7861 1015 Aberdeen PS LONDON 211 378 ‐167 55.82%
2203 1665 Springfield PS SPRINGFIELD 164 268 ‐104 61.19%
408 1125 Central PS WOODSTOCK 240 377 ‐137 63.66%
7914 1040 Arthur Stringer PS LONDON 244 381 ‐137 64.04%
2589 1810 Zorra Highland Park PS EMBRO 259 397 ‐138 65.24%
1703 1485 Oliver Stephens PS WOODSTOCK 239 366 ‐127 65.30%
2358 1730 Valleyview Central PS ILDERTON 160 245 ‐85 65.31%
558 1405 McGregor PS AYLMER 353 530 ‐177 66.60%
683 1185 East Williams Memorial PS AILSA CRAIG 212 317 ‐105 66.88%
7890 1335
Lester B Pearson
School for the Arts LONDON 278 414 ‐136 67.15%
22 1020 Adelaide ‐ W.G. MacDonald PS STRATHROY 174 256 ‐82 67.97%
716 1215 Elgin Court PS ST THOMAS 321 467 ‐146 68.74%
7904 1625 Sir John A. Macdonald PS LONDON 398.33 579 ‐180.67 68.80%
7867 1090 Byron Somerset PS LONDON 284 409 ‐125 69.44%
1148 1300 Innerkip Central PS INNERKIP 194 279 ‐85 69.53%
2280 1695 Tavistock PS TAVISTOCK 278 397 ‐119 70.03%
7909 1700 Tecumseh PS LONDON 264 377 ‐113 70.03%
1840 1530 Port Burwell PS PORT BURWELL 175 248 ‐73 70.56%
7921 1540 Prince Charles PS LONDON 426 602 ‐176 70.76%
7930 1740 Victoria PS LONDON 237 331 ‐94 71.60%
1500 1410 McGillivray Central PS AILSA CRAIG 118 164 ‐46 71.95%
7891 1355 Lord Elgin PS LONDON 324.55 446 ‐121.45 72.77%
1429 1685 Summers' Corners PS AYLMER 427 585 ‐158 72.99%
5882 1160 Davenport PS AYLMER 309 423 ‐114 73.05%
7873 1135 Chippewa PS LONDON 433 591 ‐158 73.27%
2190 1641 J.S. Buchanan FI PS STRATHROY 266 363 ‐97 73.28%
1992 1580 River Heights PS DORCHESTER 342 461 ‐119 74.19%
7879 1245 Evelyn Harrison PS LONDON 318 427 ‐109 74.47%
2248 1680 Straffordville PS STRAFFORDVILLE 345 458 ‐113 75.33%
7884 1285 Hillcrest PS LONDON 302 400 ‐98 75.50%
1826 1520 Plattsville & District PS PLATTSVILLE 242 317 ‐75 76.34%
7880 1255 Fairmont PS LONDON 272 355 ‐83 76.62%
5862 1260 Forest Park PS ST THOMAS 406.33 530 ‐123.67 76.67%
7871 1100 C. C. Carrothers PS LONDON 378.67 492 ‐113.33 76.97%
7916 1805 Wortley Road PS LONDON 226.5 292 ‐65.5 77.57%
7928 1720 Tweedsmuir PS LONDON 356 458 ‐102 77.73%
321 1105 Caradoc PS MOUNT BRYDGES 330 424 ‐94 77.83%
38 1025 Aldborough PS RODNEY 303 389 ‐86 77.89%
7932 1766 West Oaks FI PS LONDON 337 432 ‐95 78.01%
7910 1315 John P. Robarts PS LONDON 529 677 ‐148 78.14%
7875 1145 Cleardale PS LONDON 435 550 ‐115 79.09%
7866 1070 Bonaventure Meadows PS LONDON 410 518 ‐108 79.15%
7942 1296 Louise Arbour FI PS LONDON 622 783 ‐161 79.44%
7924 1575 Rick Hansen PS LONDON 385 484 ‐99 79.55%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016‐17 Schools Less Than 100% Capacity ‐ Page 1 of 3
APPENDIX C
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
2577 1655 Sparta PS ST THOMAS 244 305 ‐61 80.00%
1571 1420 Mosa Central PS GLENCOE 168 210 ‐42 80.00%
1847 1535 Port Stanley PS PORT STANLEY 254 317 ‐63 80.13%
7882 1265 Glen Cairn PS LONDON 551.63 685 ‐133.37 80.53%
550 1155 Winchester Street PS WOODSTOCK 321 393 ‐72 81.68%
11203 1925 Blenheim District PS DRUMBO 299 366 ‐67 81.69%
7913 1795 Wilton Grove PS LONDON 380 461 ‐81 82.43%
5809 1450 North Meadows PS STRATHROY 427 518 ‐91 82.43%
680 1190 East Oxford Central PS WOODSTOCK 263 317 ‐54 82.97%
7926 1595 Ryerson PS LONDON 366.53 438 ‐71.47 83.68%
7912 1790 Wilfrid Jury PS LONDON 656.45 780 ‐123.55 84.16%
322 1115 Caradoc North PS STRATHROY 182 216 ‐34 84.26%
53 1030 Algonquin PS WOODSTOCK 558 643 ‐85 86.78%
55 1999 Annandale PS TILLSONBURG 506 580 ‐74 87.24%
7892 1350 Lord Nelson PS LONDON 546 619 ‐73 88.21%
13969 1930 Laurie Hawkins PS INGERSOLL 595 671 ‐76 88.67%
7911 1785 White Oaks PS LONDON 736 829 ‐93 88.78%
7915 1800 Woodland Heights PS LONDON 560 630 ‐70 88.89%
22459 1940 Emily Stowe PS NORWICH 537 599 ‐62 89.65%
2195 1635 South Ridge PS TILLSONBURG 359 400 ‐41 89.75%
7907 1670 St. George's PS LONDON 275.63 307 ‐31.37 89.78%
7934 1780 Westmount PS LONDON 612 680 ‐68 90.00%
7865 1065 East Carling PS LONDON 416 461 ‐45 90.24%
687 1195 Eastdale PS WOODSTOCK 272.67 300 ‐27.33 90.89%
1059 1275 Hickson Central PS HICKSON 442 481 ‐39 91.89%
1664 1460 Northdale Central PS DORCHESTER 410 446 ‐36 91.93%
7881 1250 F. D. Roosevelt PS LONDON 407.4 442 ‐34.6 92.17%
11205 1905 John Wise PS ST THOMAS 576.84 625 ‐48.16 92.29%
7878 1310 Jeanne Sauvé FI PS LONDON 432 466 ‐34 92.70%
7931 1750 W. Sherwood Fox PS LONDON 430.22 464 ‐33.78 92.72%
1758 1510 Parkhill‐West Williams PS PARKHILL 220 236 ‐16 93.22%
18630 1935 Mary Wright PS STRATHROY 500 534 ‐34 93.63%
1021 1270 Harrisfield PS INGERSOLL 499 531 ‐32 93.97%
7870 1095 Byron Southwood PS LONDON 538 570 ‐32 94.39%
654 1175 Dunwich‐Dutton PS DUTTON 324 343 ‐19 94.46%
7903 1490 Orchard Park PS LONDON 232 245 ‐13 94.69%
7898 1425 Mountsfield PS LONDON 485 504 ‐19 96.23%
7929 1725 University Heights PS LONDON 320 332 ‐12 96.39%
2292 1705 Thamesford PS THAMESFORD 309 320 ‐11 96.56%
7864 1045 Ashley Oaks PS LONDON 558.42 577 ‐18.58 96.78%
2578 1435 New Sarum PS ST THOMAS 249 257 ‐8 96.89%
7887 1320 John Dearness PS LONDON 242 248 ‐6 97.58%
711 1205 Ekcoe Central PS GLENCOE 344 352 ‐8 97.73%
7923 1565 Princess Elizabeth PS LONDON 730 746 ‐16 97.86%
11204 1920 West Nissouri PS THORNDALE 384.6 392 ‐7.4 98.11%
7860 1005 Lambeth PS LONDON 621 628 ‐7 98.89%
7922 1555 Princess Anne FI PS LONDON 489 493 ‐4 99.19%
14493 1820 Westfield PS TILLSONBURG 601 602 ‐1 99.83%
Elementary Schools Subtotals 34,990.11 43,376 -8,385.89 80.67%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016‐17 Schools Less Than 100% Capacity ‐ Page 2 of 3
APPENDIX C
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Secondary Panel
7944 2341 B. Davison SS LONDON 191.2 618 ‐426.8 30.94%
5548 2230 North Middlesex DHS PARKHILL 140.94 426 ‐285.06 33.08%
5391 2120 Glencoe DHS GLENCOE 180.4 543 ‐362.6 33.22%
5214 2030 Arthur Voaden SS ST THOMAS 459.97 1059 ‐599.03 43.43%
7945 2370 Westminster SS LONDON 501.38 1119 ‐617.62 44.81%
2450 2360 West Elgin SS WEST LORNE 299.29 642 ‐342.71 46.62%
7938 2220 Montcalm SS LONDON 790.7 1251 ‐460.3 63.21%
5434 2160 Ingersoll District CI INGERSOLL 780.61 1191 ‐410.39 65.54%
7918 2080 Clarke Road SS LONDON 1026.39 1545 ‐518.61 66.43%
5309 2180 Lord Dorchester SS DORCHESTER 452.89 651 ‐198.11 69.57%
5431 2150 Huron Park SS WOODSTOCK 704.95 969 ‐264.05 72.75%
5291 2090 College Avenue SS WOODSTOCK 792.8 1053 ‐260.2 75.29%
5771 2390 Woodstock CI WOODSTOCK 530.59 690 ‐159.41 76.90%
5270 2060 Central Elgin CI ST THOMAS 552.31 717 ‐164.69 77.03%
7940 2280 Saunders SS LONDON 1540.75 1938 ‐397.25 79.50%
5392 2130 Glendale HS TILLSONBURG 797.46 996 ‐198.54 80.07%
7937 2290 London South CI LONDON 573.04 663 ‐89.96 86.43%
10174 2320 Strathroy DCI STRATHROY 1116.33 1272 ‐155.67 87.76%
5676 2260 Parkside CI ST THOMAS 901.1 972 ‐70.9 92.71%
5517 2210 Medway HS ARVA 1159.5 1245 ‐85.5 93.13%
7943 2170 Sir Wilfrid Laurier SS LONDON 1071.61 1110 ‐38.39 96.54%
7941 2040 Sir Frederick Banting SS LONDON 1287.37 1308 ‐20.63 98.42%
Secondary Schools Subtotals 15,851.58 21,978 -6,126.42 72.12%
Number of Schools
2016
October 31,
Student FTE
2016‐17
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Schools Less Than 100% Capacity ‐ Numbers Rolled Up
Elementary Subtotals 98 34,990.11 43,376 ‐8,385.89 80.67%
Secondary Subtotals 22 15,851.58 21,978 ‐6,126.42 72.12%
ALL TVDSB TOTALS 120 50,841.69 65,354 -14,512.31 77.79%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2016‐17 Schools Less Than 100% Capacity ‐ Page 3 of 3
APPENDIX C
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015-2016
All Schools (Alphabetical)
Using: 2015‐2016 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2016 January 11)
2015 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Elementary Panel
5 1010 A. J. Baker PS Kintore 157.00 95 62.00 165.26%
7861 1015 Aberdeen PS London 197.34 378 ‐180.66 52.21%
22 1020 Adelaide ‐ W.G. MacDonald PS Strathroy 183.00 256 ‐73.00 71.48%
38 1025 Aldborough PS Rodney 265.00 282 ‐17.00 93.97%
53 1030 Algonquin PS Woodstock 544.00 643 ‐99.00 84.60%
55 1999 Annandale PS Tillsonburg 617.00 580 37.00 106.38%
7863 1035 Arthur Ford PS London 339.00 320 19.00 105.94%
7914 1040 Arthur Stringer PS London 233.00 381 ‐148.00 61.15%
7864 1045 Ashley Oaks PS London 529.00 577 ‐48.00 91.68%
7865 1065 Bishop Townshend PS London 239.70 271 ‐31.30 88.45%
11203 1925 Blenheim District PS Drumbo 307.00 366 ‐59.00 83.88%
7866 1070 Bonaventure Meadows PS London 404.00 518 ‐114.00 77.99%
7869 1085 Byron Northview PS London 513.90 452 61.90 113.69%
7867 1090 Byron Somerset PS London 269.00 409 ‐140.00 65.77%
7870 1095 Byron Southwood PS London 536.00 570 ‐34.00 94.04%
7871 1100 C. C. Carrothers PS London 369.07 492 ‐122.93 75.01%
322 1115 Caradoc North PS Strathroy 190.00 216 ‐26.00 87.96%
321 1105 Caradoc PS Mt Brydges 359.00 424 ‐65.00 84.67%
1381 1120 Centennial Central PS Arva 323.10 323 0.10 100.03%
408 1125 Central PS Woodstock 251.00 377 ‐126.00 66.58%
7873 1135 Chippewa PS London 445.70 591 ‐145.30 75.41%
7874 1140 Clara Brenton PS London 615.00 564 51.00 109.04%
7875 1145 Cleardale PS London 416.00 550 ‐134.00 75.64%
5882 1160 Davenport PS Aylmer 294.00 423 ‐129.00 69.50%
569 1165 Delaware Central PS Delaware 146.00 259 ‐113.00 56.37%
654 1175 Dunwich‐Dutton PS Dutton 289.00 343 ‐54.00 84.26%
7920 1505 Eagle Heights PS London 741.00 680 61.00 108.97%
7876 1180 Ealing PS London 194.00 343 ‐149.00 56.56%
680 1190 East Oxford Central PS Woodstock 252.00 317 ‐65.00 79.50%
683 1185 East Williams Memorial PS Ailsa Craig 204.00 317 ‐113.00 64.35%
687 1195 Eastdale PS Woodstock 260.00 300 ‐40.00 86.67%
711 1205 Ekcoe Central PS Glencoe 366.00 352 14.00 103.98%
716 1215 Elgin Court PS St. Thomas 351.66 481 ‐129.34 73.11%
7877 1230 Emily Carr PS London 718.63 639 79.63 112.46%
22459 1940 Emily Stowe PS Norwich 533.00 599 ‐66.00 88.98%
7879 1245 Evelyn Harrison PS London 292.70 413 ‐120.30 70.87%
7881 1250 F. D. Roosevelt PS London 408.00 442 ‐34.00 92.31%
7880 1255 Fairmont PS London 281.00 355 ‐74.00 79.15%
5862 1260 Forest Park PS St. Thomas 426.00 530 ‐104.00 80.38%
7882 1265 Glen Cairn PS London 570.00 685 ‐115.00 83.21%
1021 1270 Harrisfield PS Ingersoll 500.30 531 ‐30.70 94.22%
1059 1275 Hickson Central PS Hickson 402.00 481 ‐79.00 83.58%
7884 1285 Hillcrest PS London 290.00 400 ‐110.00 72.50%
1148 1300 Innerkip Central PS Innerkip 209.00 279 ‐70.00 74.91%
2190 1641 J.S. Buchanan FI PS Strathroy 234.00 363 ‐129.00 64.46%
7886 1305 Jack Chambers PS London 786.00 697 89.00 112.77%
7878 1310 Jeanne Sauvé FI PS London 429.00 466 ‐37.00 92.06%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015‐2016 All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Page 1 of 4
APPENDIX D
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015-2016
All Schools (Alphabetical)
Using: 2015‐2016 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2016 January 11)
2015 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
7887 1320 John Dearness PS London 259.00 248 11.00 104.44%
7910 1315 John P. Robarts PS London 500.00 677 ‐177.00 73.86%
11205 1905 John Wise PS St. Thomas 590.00 625 ‐35.00 94.40%
5877 1200 June Rose Callwood PS St. Thomas 411.67 375 36.67 109.78%
7888 1325 Kensal Park FI PS London 829.00 737 92.00 112.48%
7889 1330 Knollwood Park PS London 233.70 447 ‐213.30 52.28%
7860 1005 Lambeth PS London 616.00 628 ‐12.00 98.09%
13969 1930 Laurie Hawkins PS Ingersoll 613.00 671 ‐58.00 91.36%
7890 1335
Lester B Pearson
School for the Arts London 279.00 414 ‐135.00 67.39%
1376 1345 Locke's PS St. Thomas 554.00 576 ‐22.00 96.18%
7891 1355 Lord Elgin PS London 334.00 446 ‐112.00 74.89%
7892 1350 Lord Nelson PS London 543.00 619 ‐76.00 87.72%
7894 1360 Lord Roberts FI PS London 401.00 306 95.00 131.05%
7893 1365 Lorne Avenue PS London 190.00 900 ‐710.00 21.11%
7942 1296 Louise Arbour FI PS London 571.00 783 ‐212.00 72.92%
18630 1935 Mary Wright PS Strathroy 497.00 534 ‐37.00 93.07%
7897 1400 Masonville PS London 451.00 363 88.00 124.24%
1500 1410 McGillivray Central PS Ailsa Craig 111.00 164 ‐53.00 67.68%
558 1405 McGregor PS Aylmer 363.00 530 ‐167.00 68.49%
11013 1900 Mitchell Hepburn PS St.Thomas 751.00 678 73.00 110.77%
1571 1420 Mosa Central PS Glencoe 167.00 210 ‐43.00 79.52%
7898 1425 Mountsfield PS London 498.00 504 ‐6.00 98.81%
2578 1435 New Sarum PS St. Thomas 250.00 257 ‐7.00 97.28%
7899 1440 Nicholas Wilson PS London 231.50 420 ‐188.50 55.12%
5809 1450 North Meadows PS Strathroy 427.00 518 ‐91.00 82.43%
7900 1455 Northbrae PS London 361.50 380 ‐18.50 95.13%
1664 1460 Northdale Central PS Dorchester 411.00 446 ‐35.00 92.15%
1667 1470 Northdale PS Woodstock 319.10 328 ‐8.90 97.29%
7902 1475 Northridge PS London 777.00 593 184.00 131.03%
1703 1485 Oliver Stephens PS Woodstock 255.00 366 ‐111.00 69.67%
7903 1490 Orchard Park PS London 222.00 245 ‐23.00 90.61%
1738 1500 Oxbow PS Ilderton 541.00 501 40.00 107.98%
1104 1290 P. E. Trudeau FI PS St. Thomas 751.00 530 221.00 141.70%
1758 1510 Parkhill‐West Williams PS Parkhill 211.67 236 ‐24.33 89.69%
1770 1515 Parkview PS Komoka 609.00 602 7.00 101.16%
1826 1520 Plattsville & District PS Plattsville 232.40 317 ‐84.60 73.31%
1840 1530 Port Burwell PS Port Burwell 171.00 248 ‐77.00 68.95%
1847 1535 Port Stanley PS Port Stanley 94.00 317 ‐223.00 29.65%
7921 1540 Prince Charles PS London 451.02 602 ‐150.98 74.92%
7922 1555 Princess Anne FI PS London 498.00 493 5.00 101.01%
7923 1565 Princess Elizabeth PS London 664.00 746 ‐82.00 89.01%
7924 1575 Rick Hansen PS London 389.00 484 ‐95.00 80.37%
1992 1580 River Heights PS Dorchester 353.39 461 ‐107.61 76.66%
7925 1585 Riverside PS London 414.00 412 2.00 100.49%
1137 1281 Roch Carrier FI PS Woodstock 360.00 282 78.00 127.66%
1877 1550 Royal Roads PS Ingersoll 415.09 400 15.09 103.77%
7926 1595 Ryerson PS London 383.55 438 ‐54.45 87.57%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015‐2016 All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Page 2 of 4
APPENDIX D
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015-2016
All Schools (Alphabetical)
Using: 2015‐2016 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2016 January 11)
2015 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
7872 1620 Sir Georges Etienne Cartier PS London 301.00 251 50.00 119.92%
7883 1615 Sir Isaac Brock PS London 396.60 349 47.60 113.64%
7904 1625 Sir John A. Macdonald PS London 403.00 579 ‐176.00 69.60%
600 1630 South Dorchester PS Belmont 200.00 190 10.00 105.26%
2195 1635 South Ridge PS Tillsonburg 327.00 400 ‐73.00 81.75%
2193 1645 Southside PS Woodstock 285.00 147 138.00 193.88%
2194 1650 Southwold PS St. Thomas 654.00 654 0.00 100.00%
2577 1655 Sparta PS St.Thomas 242.00 305 ‐63.00 79.34%
2201 1660 Springbank PS Woodstock 459.00 366 93.00 125.41%
2203 1665 Springfield PS Springfield 167.00 268 ‐101.00 62.31%
7907 1670 St. George's PS London 256.00 307 ‐51.00 83.39%
11217 1915 Stoney Creek PS London 938.00 629 309.00 149.13%
7908 1675 Stoneybrook PS London 400.00 423 ‐23.00 94.56%
2248 1680 Straffordville PS Straffordville 363.00 458 ‐95.00 79.26%
1429 1685 Summers' Corners PS Aylmer 399.00 585 ‐186.00 68.21%
2280 1695 Tavistock PS Tavistock 293.00 397 ‐104.00 73.80%
7909 1700 Tecumseh PS London 260.95 377 ‐116.05 69.22%
2292 1705 Thamesford PS Thamesford 294.00 320 ‐26.00 91.88%
7927 1715 Trafalgar PS London 172.00 409 ‐237.00 42.05%
7928 1720 Tweedsmuir PS London 384.00 458 ‐74.00 83.84%
7929 1725 University Heights PS London 307.00 332 ‐25.00 92.47%
2358 1730 Valleyview Central PS Ilderton 153.00 245 ‐92.00 62.45%
7930 1740 Victoria PS London 241.00 331 ‐90.00 72.81%
7931 1750 W. Sherwood Fox PS London 375.00 464 ‐89.00 80.82%
5886 1760 West Elgin Sr PS West Lorne 80.00 268 ‐188.00 29.85%
11204 1920 West Nissouri PS Thorndale 358.33 366 ‐7.67 97.90%
7932 1766 West Oaks FI PS London 344.00 432 ‐88.00 79.63%
14493 1820 Westfield PS Tillsonburg 506.00 602 ‐96.00 84.05%
7933 1775 Westminster Central PS London 82.00 302 ‐220.00 27.15%
7934 1780 Westmount PS London 590.00 680 ‐90.00 86.76%
7911 1785 White Oaks PS London 711.00 829 ‐118.00 85.77%
11104 1910 Wilberforce PS Lucan 502.00 461 41.00 108.89%
7912 1790 Wilfrid Jury PS London 635.00 780 ‐145.00 81.41%
7913 1795 Wilton Grove PS London 388.00 461 ‐73.00 84.16%
550 1155 Winchester Street PS Woodstock 326.00 393 ‐67.00 82.95%
7915 1800 Woodland Heights PS London 539.55 630 ‐90.45 85.64%
7916 1805 Wortley Road PS London 224.00 292 ‐68.00 76.71%
2589 1810 Zorra Highland Park PS Embro 268.00 466 ‐198.00 57.51%
Elementary Schools Subtotals 50,859.12 58,593 -7,733.88 86.80%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015‐2016 All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Page 3 of 4
APPENDIX D
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015-2016
All Schools (Alphabetical)
Using: 2015‐2016 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2016 January 11)
2015 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Secondary Panel
7917 2190 A. B. Lucas SS London 1,434.75 1,188 246.75 120.77%
5214 2030 Arthur Voaden SS St. Thomas 463.12 1,059 ‐595.88 43.73%
7944 2341 B. Davison SS London 224.88 606 ‐381.12 37.11%
5270 2060 Central Elgin CI St. Thomas 579.20 717 ‐137.80 80.78%
7936 2070 Central SS London 984.78 786 198.78 125.29%
7918 2080 Clarke Road SS London 1,080.83 1,557 ‐476.17 69.42%
5291 2090 College Avenue SS Woodstock 774.27 1,053 ‐278.73 73.53%
5325 2100 East Elgin SS Aylmer 1,300.40 1,164 136.40 111.72%
5391 2120 Glencoe DHS Glencoe 181.70 543 ‐361.30 33.46%
5392 2130 Glendale HS Tillsonburg 818.86 996 ‐177.14 82.21%
7935 2140 H.B. Beal SS London 1,813.95 1,857 ‐43.05 97.68%
5431 2150 Huron Park SS Woodstock 742.71 969 ‐226.29 76.65%
5434 2160 Ingersoll District CI Ingersoll 793.45 1,191 ‐397.55 66.62%
7937 2290 London South CI London 618.86 663 ‐44.14 93.34%
5309 2180 Lord Dorchester SS Dorchester 466.09 651 ‐184.91 71.60%
5517 2210 Medway HS Arva 1,105.75 1,245 ‐139.25 88.82%
7938 2220 Montcalm SS London 717.25 1,263 ‐545.75 56.79%
5548 2230 North Middlesex DHS Parkhill 184.32 426 ‐241.68 43.27%
7939 2250 Oakridge SS London 997.57 945 52.57 105.56%
5676 2260 Parkside CI St. Thomas 906.20 972 ‐65.80 93.23%
7940 2280 Saunders SS London 1,513.42 1,950 ‐436.58 77.61%
7941 2040 Sir Frederick Banting SS London 1,314.22 1,308 6.22 100.48%
7943 2170 Sir Wilfrid Laurier SS London 1,053.64 1,110 ‐56.36 94.92%
10174 2320 Strathroy DCI Strathroy 1,108.12 1,335 ‐226.88 83.01%
2450 2360 West Elgin SS West Lorne 317.00 642 ‐325.00 49.38%
7945 2370 Westminster SS London 505.76 1,119 ‐613.24 45.20%
5771 2390 Woodstock CI Woodstock 555.29 690 ‐134.71 80.48%
Secondary Schools Subtotals 22,556.39 28,005 -5,448.61 80.54%
Number of
Schools
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Accommodations Capacity: All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Numbers Rolled Up
Elementary Subtotals 132 50,859.12 58,593 ‐7,733.88 86.80%
Secondary Subtotals 27 22,556.39 28,005 ‐5,448.61 80.54%
ALL TVDSB TOTALS 159 73,415.51 86,598 -13,182.49 84.78%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015‐2016 All Schools (Alphabetical) ‐ Page 4 of 4
APPENDIX D
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015-2016
Schools At 100% Capacity or Greater
Using: 2015‐2016 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2016 January 11)
2015 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Elementary Panel
2193 1645 Southside PS Woodstock 285.00 147 138.00 193.88%
5 1010 A. J. Baker PS Kintore 157.00 95 62.00 165.26%
11217 1915 Stoney Creek PS London 938.00 629 309.00 149.13%
1104 1290 P. E. Trudeau FI PS St. Thomas 751.00 530 221.00 141.70%
7894 1360 Lord Roberts FI PS London 401.00 306 95.00 131.05%
7902 1475 Northridge PS London 777.00 593 184.00 131.03%
1137 1281 Roch Carrier FI PS Woodstock 360.00 282 78.00 127.66%
2201 1660 Springbank PS Woodstock 459.00 366 93.00 125.41%
7897 1400 Masonville PS London 451.00 363 88.00 124.24%
7872 1620 Sir Georges Etienne Cartier PS London 301.00 251 50.00 119.92%
7869 1085 Byron Northview PS London 513.90 452 61.90 113.69%
7883 1615 Sir Isaac Brock PS London 396.60 349 47.60 113.64%
7886 1305 Jack Chambers PS London 786.00 697 89.00 112.77%
7888 1325 Kensal Park FI PS London 829.00 737 92.00 112.48%
7877 1230 Emily Carr PS London 718.63 639 79.63 112.46%
11013 1900 Mitchell Hepburn PS St.Thomas 751.00 678 73.00 110.77%
5877 1200 June Rose Callwood PS St. Thomas 411.67 375 36.67 109.78%
7874 1140 Clara Brenton PS London 615.00 564 51.00 109.04%
7920 1505 Eagle Heights PS London 741.00 680 61.00 108.97%
11104 1910 Wilberforce PS Lucan 502.00 461 41.00 108.89%
1738 1500 Oxbow PS Ilderton 541.00 501 40.00 107.98%
55 1999 Annandale PS Tillsonburg 617.00 580 37.00 106.38%
7863 1035 Arthur Ford PS London 339.00 320 19.00 105.94%
600 1630 South Dorchester PS Belmont 200.00 190 10.00 105.26%
7887 1320 John Dearness PS London 259.00 248 11.00 104.44%
711 1205 Ekcoe Central PS Glencoe 366.00 352 14.00 103.98%
1877 1550 Royal Roads PS Ingersoll 415.09 400 15.09 103.77%
1770 1515 Parkview PS Komoka 609.00 602 7.00 101.16%
7922 1555 Princess Anne FI PS London 498.00 493 5.00 101.01%
7925 1585 Riverside PS London 414.00 412 2.00 100.49%
1381 1120 Centennial Central PS Arva 323.10 323 0.10 100.03%
2194 1650 Southwold PS St. Thomas 654.00 654 0.00 100.00%
Elementary Schools Subtotals 16,379.99 14,269 2,110.99 114.79%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015‐2016 Schools At 100% Capacity or Greater ‐ Page 1 of 2
APPENDIX E
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015-2016
Schools At 100% Capacity or Greater
Using: 2015‐2016 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2016 January 11)
2015 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Secondary Panel
7936 2070 Central SS London 984.78 786 198.78 125.29%
7917 2190 A. B. Lucas SS London 1,434.75 1,188 246.75 120.77%
5325 2100 East Elgin SS Aylmer 1,300.40 1,164 136.40 111.72%
7939 2250 Oakridge SS London 997.57 945 52.57 105.56%
7941 2040 Sir Frederick Banting SS London 1,314.22 1,308 6.22 100.48%
Secondary Schools Subtotals 6,031.72 5,391 640.72 111.88%
Number of
Schools
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Accommodations Capacity: Schools At 100% Capacity or Greater ‐ Numbers Rolled Up
Elementary Subtotals 32 16,379.99 14,269 2,110.99 114.79%
Secondary Subtotals 5 6,031.72 5,391 640.72 111.88%
ALL TVDSB TOTALS 37 22,411.71 19,660 2,751.71
114.00%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015‐2016 Schools At 100% Capacity or Greater ‐ Page 2 of 2
APPENDIX E
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015-2016
Schools Less Than 100% Capacity
Using: 2015‐2016 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2016 January 11)
2015 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Elementary Panel
7893 1365 Lorne Avenue PS London 190.00 900 ‐710.00 21.11%
7933 1775 Westminster Central PS London 82.00 302 ‐220.00 27.15%
1847 1535 Port Stanley PS Port Stanley 94.00 317 ‐223.00 29.65%
5886 1760 West Elgin Sr PS West Lorne 80.00 268 ‐188.00 29.85%
7927 1715 Trafalgar PS London 172.00 409 ‐237.00 42.05%
7861 1015 Aberdeen PS London 197.34 378 ‐180.66 52.21%
7889 1330 Knollwood Park PS London 233.70 447 ‐213.30 52.28%
7899 1440 Nicholas Wilson PS London 231.50 420 ‐188.50 55.12%
569 1165 Delaware Central PS Delaware 146.00 259 ‐113.00 56.37%
7876 1180 Ealing PS London 194.00 343 ‐149.00 56.56%
2589 1810 Zorra Highland Park PS Embro 268.00 466 ‐198.00 57.51%
7914 1040 Arthur Stringer PS London 233.00 381 ‐148.00 61.15%
2203 1665 Springfield PS Springfield 167.00 268 ‐101.00 62.31%
2358 1730 Valleyview Central PS Ilderton 153.00 245 ‐92.00 62.45%
683 1185 East Williams Memorial PS Ailsa Craig 204.00 317 ‐113.00 64.35%
2190 1641 J.S. Buchanan FI PS Strathroy 234.00 363 ‐129.00 64.46%
7867 1090 Byron Somerset PS London 269.00 409 ‐140.00 65.77%
408 1125 Central PS Woodstock 251.00 377 ‐126.00 66.58%
7890 1335
Lester B Pearson
School for the Arts London 279.00 414 ‐135.00 67.39%
1500 1410 McGillivray Central PS Ailsa Craig 111.00 164 ‐53.00 67.68%
1429 1685 Summers' Corners PS Aylmer 399.00 585 ‐186.00 68.21%
558 1405 McGregor PS Aylmer 363.00 530 ‐167.00 68.49%
1840 1530 Port Burwell PS Port Burwell 171.00 248 ‐77.00 68.95%
7909 1700 Tecumseh PS London 260.95 377 ‐116.05 69.22%
5882 1160 Davenport PS Aylmer 294.00 423 ‐129.00 69.50%
7904 1625 Sir John A. Macdonald PS London 403.00 579 ‐176.00 69.60%
1703 1485 Oliver Stephens PS Woodstock 255.00 366 ‐111.00 69.67%
7879 1245 Evelyn Harrison PS London 292.70 413 ‐120.30 70.87%
22 1020 Adelaide ‐ W.G. MacDonald PS Strathroy 183.00 256 ‐73.00 71.48%
7884 1285 Hillcrest PS London 290.00 400 ‐110.00 72.50%
7930 1740 Victoria PS London 241.00 331 ‐90.00 72.81%
7942 1296 Louise Arbour FI PS London 571.00 783 ‐212.00 72.92%
716 1215 Elgin Court PS St. Thomas 351.66 481 ‐129.34 73.11%
1826 1520 Plattsville & District PS Plattsville 232.40 317 ‐84.60 73.31%
2280 1695 Tavistock PS Tavistock 293.00 397 ‐104.00 73.80%
7910 1315 John P. Robarts PS London 500.00 677 ‐177.00 73.86%
7891 1355 Lord Elgin PS London 334.00 446 ‐112.00 74.89%
1148 1300 Innerkip Central PS Innerkip 209.00 279 ‐70.00 74.91%
7921 1540 Prince Charles PS London 451.02 602 ‐150.98 74.92%
7871 1100 C. C. Carrothers PS London 369.07 492 ‐122.93 75.01%
7873 1135 Chippewa PS London 445.70 591 ‐145.30 75.41%
7875 1145 Cleardale PS London 416.00 550 ‐134.00 75.64%
1992 1580 River Heights PS Dorchester 353.39 461 ‐107.61 76.66%
7916 1805 Wortley Road PS London 224.00 292 ‐68.00 76.71%
7866 1070 Bonaventure Meadows PS London 404.00 518 ‐114.00 77.99%
7880 1255 Fairmont PS London 281.00 355 ‐74.00 79.15%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015‐2016 Schools Less Than 100% Capacity ‐ Page 1 of 3
APPENDIX F
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015-2016
Schools Less Than 100% Capacity
Using: 2015‐2016 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2016 January 11)
2015 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
2248 1680 Straffordville PS Straffordville 363.00 458 ‐95.00 79.26%
2577 1655 Sparta PS St.Thomas 242.00 305 ‐63.00 79.34%
680 1190 East Oxford Central PS Woodstock 252.00 317 ‐65.00 79.50%
1571 1420 Mosa Central PS Glencoe 167.00 210 ‐43.00 79.52%
7932 1766 West Oaks FI PS London 344.00 432 ‐88.00 79.63%
7924 1575 Rick Hansen PS London 389.00 484 ‐95.00 80.37%
5862 1260 Forest Park PS St. Thomas 426.00 530 ‐104.00 80.38%
7931 1750 W. Sherwood Fox PS London 375.00 464 ‐89.00 80.82%
7912 1790 Wilfrid Jury PS London 635.00 780 ‐145.00 81.41%
2195 1635 South Ridge PS Tillsonburg 327.00 400 ‐73.00 81.75%
5809 1450 North Meadows PS Strathroy 427.00 518 ‐91.00 82.43%
550 1155 Winchester Street PS Woodstock 326.00 393 ‐67.00 82.95%
7882 1265 Glen Cairn PS London 570.00 685 ‐115.00 83.21%
7907 1670 St. George's PS London 256.00 307 ‐51.00 83.39%
1059 1275 Hickson Central PS Hickson 402.00 481 ‐79.00 83.58%
7928 1720 Tweedsmuir PS London 384.00 458 ‐74.00 83.84%
11203 1925 Blenheim District PS Drumbo 307.00 366 ‐59.00 83.88%
14493 1820 Westfield PS Tillsonburg 506.00 602 ‐96.00 84.05%
7913 1795 Wilton Grove PS London 388.00 461 ‐73.00 84.16%
654 1175 Dunwich‐Dutton PS Dutton 289.00 343 ‐54.00 84.26%
53 1030 Algonquin PS Woodstock 544.00 643 ‐99.00 84.60%
321 1105 Caradoc PS Mt Brydges 359.00 424 ‐65.00 84.67%
7915 1800 Woodland Heights PS London 539.55 630 ‐90.45 85.64%
7911 1785 White Oaks PS London 711.00 829 ‐118.00 85.77%
687 1195 Eastdale PS Woodstock 260.00 300 ‐40.00 86.67%
7934 1780 Westmount PS London 590.00 680 ‐90.00 86.76%
7926 1595 Ryerson PS London 383.55 438 ‐54.45 87.57%
7892 1350 Lord Nelson PS London 543.00 619 ‐76.00 87.72%
322 1115 Caradoc North PS Strathroy 190.00 216 ‐26.00 87.96%
7865 1065 Bishop Townshend PS London 239.70 271 ‐31.30 88.45%
22459 1940 Emily Stowe PS Norwich 533.00 599 ‐66.00 88.98%
7923 1565 Princess Elizabeth PS London 664.00 746 ‐82.00 89.01%
1758 1510 Parkhill‐West Williams PS Parkhill 211.67 236 ‐24.33 89.69%
7903 1490 Orchard Park PS London 222.00 245 ‐23.00 90.61%
13969 1930 Laurie Hawkins PS Ingersoll 613.00 671 ‐58.00 91.36%
7864 1045 Ashley Oaks PS London 529.00 577 ‐48.00 91.68%
2292 1705 Thamesford PS Thamesford 294.00 320 ‐26.00 91.88%
7878 1310 Jeanne Sauvé FI PS London 429.00 466 ‐37.00 92.06%
1664 1460 Northdale Central PS Dorchester 411.00 446 ‐35.00 92.15%
7881 1250 F. D. Roosevelt PS London 408.00 442 ‐34.00 92.31%
7929 1725 University Heights PS London 307.00 332 ‐25.00 92.47%
18630 1935 Mary Wright PS Strathroy 497.00 534 ‐37.00 93.07%
38 1025 Aldborough PS Rodney 265.00 282 ‐17.00 93.97%
7870 1095 Byron Southwood PS London 536.00 570 ‐34.00 94.04%
1021 1270 Harrisfield PS Ingersoll 500.30 531 ‐30.70 94.22%
11205 1905 John Wise PS St. Thomas 590.00 625 ‐35.00 94.40%
7908 1675 Stoneybrook PS London 400.00 423 ‐23.00 94.56%
7900 1455 Northbrae PS London 361.50 380 ‐18.50 95.13%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015‐2016 Schools Less Than 100% Capacity ‐ Page 2 of 3
APPENDIX F
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015-2016
Schools Less Than 100% Capacity
Using: 2015‐2016 OTG ‐ SFIS (downloaded 2016 January 11)
2015 October 31, Month‐End Enrolment by Grade
SFIS
Number
TVDSB
Number Name City/Town
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
1376 1345 Locke's PS St. Thomas 554.00 576 ‐22.00 96.18%
2578 1435 New Sarum PS St. Thomas 250.00 257 ‐7.00 97.28%
1667 1470 Northdale PS Woodstock 319.10 328 ‐8.90 97.29%
11204 1920 West Nissouri PS Thorndale 358.33 366 ‐7.67 97.90%
7860 1005 Lambeth PS London 616.00 628 ‐12.00 98.09%
7898 1425 Mountsfield PS London 498.00 504 ‐6.00 98.81%
Elementary Schools Subtotals 34,479.13 44,324 -9,844.87 77.79%
Secondary Panel
7935 2140 H.B. Beal SS London 1,813.95 1,857 ‐43.05 97.68%
7943 2170 Sir Wilfrid Laurier SS London 1,053.64 1,110 ‐56.36 94.92%
7937 2290 London South CI London 618.86 663 ‐44.14 93.34%
5676 2260 Parkside CI St. Thomas 906.20 972 ‐65.80 93.23%
5517 2210 Medway HS Arva 1,105.75 1,245 ‐139.25 88.82%
10174 2320 Strathroy DCI Strathroy 1,108.12 1,335 ‐226.88 83.01%
5392 2130 Glendale HS Tillsonburg 818.86 996 ‐177.14 82.21%
5270 2060 Central Elgin CI St. Thomas 579.20 717 ‐137.80 80.78%
5771 2390 Woodstock CI Woodstock 555.29 690 ‐134.71 80.48%
7940 2280 Saunders SS London 1,513.42 1,950 ‐436.58 77.61%
5431 2150 Huron Park SS Woodstock 742.71 969 ‐226.29 76.65%
5291 2090 College Avenue SS Woodstock 774.27 1,053 ‐278.73 73.53%
5309 2180 Lord Dorchester SS Dorchester 466.09 651 ‐184.91 71.60%
7918 2080 Clarke Road SS London 1,080.83 1,557 ‐476.17 69.42%
5434 2160 Ingersoll District CI Ingersoll 793.45 1,191 ‐397.55 66.62%
7938 2220 Montcalm SS London 717.25 1,263 ‐545.75 56.79%
2450 2360 West Elgin SS West Lorne 317.00 642 ‐325.00 49.38%
7945 2370 Westminster SS London 505.76 1,119 ‐613.24 45.20%
5214 2030 Arthur Voaden SS St. Thomas 463.12 1,059 ‐595.88 43.73%
5548 2230 North Middlesex DHS Parkhill 184.32 426 ‐241.68 43.27%
7944 2341 B. Davison SS London 224.88 606 ‐381.12 37.11%
5391 2120 Glencoe DHS Glencoe 181.70 543 ‐361.30 33.46%
Secondary Schools Subtotals 16,524.67 22,614 -6,089.33 73.07%
Number of
Schools
2015
October 31,
Student FTE
2015‐2016
Total OTG
Capacity
Pupil Places
(Plus or Minus)
Accommodation
Capacity (%)
Accommodations Capacity: Schools Less Than 100% Capacity ‐ Numbers Rolled Up
Elementary Subtotals 100 34,479.13 44,324 ‐9,844.87 77.79%
Secondary Subtotals 22 16,524.67 22,614 ‐6,089.33 73.07%
ALL TVDSB TOTALS 122 51,003.80 66,938 -15,934.20 76.20%
Enrolment Versus Capacity Report 2015‐2016 Schools Less Than 100% Capacity ‐ Page 3 of 3
APPENDIX F
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Date of
Meeting: 2017 May 23
Item #:
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐
IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐
Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☐
Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐
Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF REPORT:
PUBLIC DELEGATION PRESENTATIONS REPORT – ELEMENTARY PUPIL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW 02
PRESENTED BY:
Kevin Bushell, Executive Officer, Facility Services and Capital Planning
PRESENTED FOR: ☐ Approval ☒ Information ☐ Advice
Recommendation(s):
Purpose: To provide to the Board, as stated in the Pupil Accommodation and Facility Organization Procedure
(No.4015a), the feedback received by virtue of the presentations made during the Public Delegation Meeting,
on 2017 May 02 and 2017 May 03 regarding the Final Senior Administration Report for Elementary Pupil
Accommodation Review 02.
Content: As stated in the Pupil Accommodation and Facility Organization Procedure (No.4015a), TVDSB
Administration has compiled the feedback received by virtue of the presentations made during the Public
Delegation Meeting, on 2017 May 02 and 2017 May 03.
The Public Delegation Meeting was convened for the purpose of allowing Community Organizations and
members of the public to provide feedback to the Trustees on the Final Senior Administration Report, for
Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review 02.
Notice of the Public Delegation Meeting was included in the respective Final Senior Administration Report and
posted on the TVDSB website. The deadline to submit the Public Delegation Presentation Request
Application was 2017 April 24. A total of NIL applications were received and presented to the Trustees at the
Public Delegation Meeting on 2017 May 02 and 2017 May 03.
Cost/Savings: N/A
Timeline: N/A
Communications: N/A
Appendices: N/A
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☒ Putting students first. ☒ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☐ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☒ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Date of
Meeting: 2017 May 23
Item #:
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐
IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐
Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☐
Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐
Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF REPORT:
PUBLIC DELEGATION PRESENTATIONS REPORT – ELEMENTARY PUPIL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW 01
PRESENTED BY:
Kevin Bushell, Executive Officer, Facility Services and Capital Planning
PRESENTED FOR: ☐ Approval ☒ Information ☐ Advice
Recommendation(s):
Purpose: To provide to the Board, as stated in the Pupil Accommodation and Facility Organization Procedure
(No.4015a), the feedback received by virtue of the presentations made during the Public Delegation Meeting,
on 2017 May 02 and 2017 May 03 regarding the Final Senior Administration Report for Elementary Pupil
Accommodation Review 01.
Content: As stated in the Pupil Accommodation and Facility Organization Procedure (No.4015a), TVDSB
Administration have compiled the feedback received by virtue of the presentations made during the Public
Delegation Meeting, on 2017 May 02 and 2017 May 03.
The Public Delegation Meeting was convened for the purpose of allowing Community Organizatio ns and
members of the public to provide feedback to the Trustees on the Final Senior Administration Report, for
Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review 01.
Notice of the Public Delegation Meeting was included in the respective Final Senior Administration R eport and
posted on the TVDSB website. The deadline to submit the Public Delegation Presentation Request
Application was 2017 April 24. A total of 57 applications were received and presented to the Trustees at the
Public Delegation Meeting on 2017 May 02 and 2017 May 03.
Cost/Savings: N/A
Timeline: N/A
Communications: N/A
Appendices: A. Listing of Presenters
B. Presenters Packages
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☒ Putting students first. ☒ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☐ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☒ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
Scheduled
Time
(p.m.)
Time
Allotted
(min.)
Name/Organization Key Message Power
Point Region
Name of
School
Community
6:05 5
Marcus Ryan New Sarum, Sparta, and Springfield should not close.A.J. Baker
6:10 5
Mayor Dave Mennill,
Township of Malahide
Mayor Dave Mennill will be presenting the Malahide Township Council's
concerns with respect to the proposal to close the Springfield Public School.
His presentation will emphasize the importance of schools as hubs in
communities, the economic benefits of schools and the connection to
residential development,
the social impacts of dislocating students and transferring them to other
schools, the unique programs offered in rural schools, such as environmental
programs; and requests that any accommodation review be cognizant of
these broader impacts and not just be focused on the bottom line. He will
further request that the Board of Trustees not proceed with the
recommendation to close the Springfield Public School.
Northern Springfield
6:15 5
Daniel West A review of the driving forces behind this PAR vs considerations that are
neglected in it.
A.J. Baker
6:20 5
Mayor David Marr,
Municipality of Central
Elgin
I will present the Municipality of Central Elgin position on the review. Belmont, New
Sarum, Sparta
and Port
Stanley
6:25 5
Sally Martyn The importance of rural schools in hamlets and villages, transportation costs
and French Immersion
Southern Sparta
6:30 10
Heather Derks, Sparta
School Council
School Council Chair speaking in response to recommendations of the FSAR
Southern Sparta
6:40 5
Valerie Everatt Keep Sparta school open - English track Southern Sparta
PUBLIC INPUT SCHEDULE: TUESDAY MAY 2
APPENDIX A
6:45 5
Sarita Vandernaalt Keep Sparta Public School open Southern Sparta
6:50 10
Alison Fleming, Home
and School Association
I will be speaking on behalf of the PTA about parent involvement, the role of
our school in the community and the need for a school in the community of
Sparta. I will be discussing the concerns parents and students have brought
to the PTA.
Southern Sparta
7:00 5
Meagan Ruddock Keep Sparta and Port Stanley public Schools Status Quo Southern Sparta
7:05 5
Hailey Clark Save Sparta School- presentation from a grade 6 Student Southern Sparta
7:10 5
Ruby Denniss Sparta is a school that gives me and my friends great experiences. Keep us
at Sparta, it makes the most sense.
Southern Sparta
7:15 5
Heidi Weninger I will be speaking to the Board of Trustees as to why my family wants Sparta
Public School to remain open.
Southern Sparta
7:20 5
Ashton, Corbin, and
Owen
A grade 7 student in French Immersion (Ashton) will speak to his experience
as a student who transitioned to Port Stanley PS for the 2016-17 school year.
He and two grade 6 students (Corbin and Owen) in the English track at Port
Stanley PS will present two short videos created to showcase the unique
offerings of the school and school community. They will speak to the need to
support the recommendations of Senior Administration as they relate to Port
Stanley Public School.
Southern Port Stanley
7:25 10
Janet Palmer, Port
Stanley School Council &
Port Stanley PAR
Committee
The Port Stanley community supports the recommendations made for Port
Stanley and Sparta Public School, and asks the Trustees to vote in favour of
closing Sparta and accommodating students at Port Stanley PS.
Southern Port Stanley
APPENDIX A
7:35 5
Christa Mobberley,
Mitchell Hepburn PAR
Committee
BUILD THE SOUTHEAST ST THOMAS SCHOOL Western Mitchell
Hepburn
7:40 10
Lisa Rattray, Mitchell
Hepburn School Council
Support new South East St Thomas school Western Mitchell
Hepburn
7:50 5
Marian Knelson To keep New Sarum public school open.Northern New Sarum
7:55 5
Kate Hurst Review of the parent/guardian feedback gathered by the New Sarum PS
PARC including survey results and key themes discussed during school level
meetings.
Northern New Sarum
8:00 5
Ron Fish I am requesting that the Trustees look at the facts before making their
decisions in regards to the final EPAR 01 recommendations. We live in a
diverse province and a one size fits all approach is not the diversity that is
Ontario.
Northern New Sarum
8:05 5
Wade Fitzgerald Consideration of keeping New Sarum public school open Northern New Sarum
8:10 5
Neil Clarke Removal of New Sarum PS closure from EPAR-01 highlighting public input.Northern New Sarum
8:15 5
Allison Fish I would like to present to the Board of Trustees the key reasons why my family
and other families with children attending New Sarum Public School are not
supporting the recommendations to close NSPS, as outlined in the FSAR.
Northern New Sarum
8:20 5
Morgan Brittan Van Wyk Non-closure for New Sarum: thoughts about rural school life and its value.Northern New Sarum
APPENDIX A
8:25 5
Danika Sims response to EPAR-01 final recommendations Northern New Sarum
8:30 5
Amanda Matthews New Sarum should remain open as an English track K-8 elementary school,
with current boundaries. Our school community has observed a disconnect
between Ministry of Education and/or TVDSB goals and strategies and the
recommendation as it pertains to the closure of New Sarum.
Northern New Sarum
8:35 5
Doug Tarry/Carrie
O’Brien, Doug Tarry
Homes
Development update, consider the volume of families moving to this area
Mitchell
Hepburn
8:40 5
Nathan Taylor Keeping New Sarum School Open Northern New Sarum
8:45 10
Amy Smith, New Sarum
School Council
A presentation to provide the reasons that the New Sarum school community
does not agree with the recommendation contained in the FSAR to close New
Sarum. We will be requesting the Board of Trustees to vote against senior
administration's recommendation to close New Sarum Public School.
Northern New Sarum
8:55 5
Jeff Yurek, M.P.P.Allow the build of the new school in Belmont to proceed while ensuring New
Sarum, Springfield and Sparta remain open.
Split EPAR 1 into 2 separate portions allowing for an extensive period to
thoroughly review and consult on the need to close the rural schools in the
communities listed in EPAR 1
9:00 5
John Hueston Leave open the rural schools in this PAR. Consider a smaller new school for
Belmont, or no new school.
Aylmer
APPENDIX A
Scheduled Time (p.m.)Time Allotted (min)Name/Organization Key MessagePower pointRegionName of School Community6:05 5John TwinemQuality of connection & impact on student quality of life. Action: Keep the school in the community of Springfield openNorthern Springfield6:10 5Kelly PearsonSpringfield Community Involvement & school historyNorthern Springfield6:15 5Mike PercyImpact of closure of Springfield Public school as it pertains to my family with 2 students in the school. Action: To keep Springfield Public School OpenNorthern Springfield6:20 5Maria SmitOutreach / partnership between School & Library. Action: Keep the school in Springfield openNorthern Springfield6:25 5Amanda ShackeltonRural vs Urban school and how it relates to my family, community & school. Keep Springfield PS open and bring back grade 7 & 8'sNorthern Springfield6:30 5Tracy GorisAgriculture and how farm families are affected. Keep Springfield open and bring 7 & 8's back to the schoolNorthern Springfield6:35 10Mary Giesbrecht, Springfield School CouncilParental & Community Involvement in the School. Keep Springfield Public School OpenNorthern Springfield6:45 5Jean TurnerProvincial Testimonial about School. Keep Springfield Public School Open and bring our 7 & 8's backNorthern Springfield6:50 5Janette WallAffects of increased bussing on students. Keep Springfield open and bring back our 7 & 8'sNorthern Springfield6:55 5Peter RochusEnvironmental impact of the PAR. Keep Springfield open and bring back our 7 & 8'sNorthern SpringfieldPUBLIC INPUT SCHEDULE: WEDNESDAY MAY 3APPENDIX A
7:00 5Rebecca ClarkPresentation on Mental Health from a social worker and Springfield Parent. Keep us open and bring our 7 & 8's backNorthern Springfield7:05 5Kellen Devos, Out There Creative TherapyIn our presentation we are bringing attention to the fact Out There Creative Therapy is creating a "space" in Springfield that would provide invaluable education to the students of the school. Also provide support for Mental Health. We request the Board of Trustees leave Springfield Public School OpenNorthern Springfield7:10 5Greg FentieFinancial analysis / concerns of the EPAR. Action: Bring 7 & 8 students back to Springfield, Open us up for collaborative space and ultimately keep us open.Northern Springfield7:15 5Chris CoxFinancial concerns of the EPAR and growth of Springfield. Action: Bring 7 & 8 students back to Springfield, Open us up for collaborative space and ultimately keep us open.Northern Springfield7:20 5Johnny WilsonAccountability. Action: Keep Springfield Public School OpenNorthern Springfield7:25 5Jessica GoodwillPersonal Experience, the big picture. Action: Keep Springfield Public School open, bring our 7 & 8's back or open up the school for collaborate effortsNorthern Springfield7:30 5Cameron CharltonThe status quo is the worst possible outcome here, growth and future student/community development are more important than the status quo; Requesting support for the proposed new Belmont School.Northern South Dorchester7:35 5Brad HalvorsenBelmont community member perspective; Support for the proposed new Belmont School.Northern South Dorchester7:40 5Dave RobertsGrowth in Belmont, changing farm industry, condition of SDPS; Support for the proposed new Belmont SchoolNorthern South DorchesterAPPENDIX A
7:45 5Noelle Racicot‐KellyThe need for the proposed new Belmont school from the perspective of a parent who has older children who have moved through SDPS and Davenport; Support for the proposed new Belmont School.Northern South Dorchester7:50 5Mallory HesselmansSDPS student perspective; support for the proposed Belmont School.Northern South Dorchester7:55 10Catherine Hann, South Dorchester School CouncilSpeaking of the support myself, SDPS PAC, and Belmont have for the proposed new Belmont School, condition of SDPS, financial benefits, status quo is unacceptable; support for the proposed new Belmont School.Northern South Dorchester8:05 5Melissa Houghsupport for the Belmont school, fostering positive change, WCPS children's perspectiveNorthern Westminster8:10 5Ila MandersonA past Westminster Central PS graduate's perspective of what I missed out on at WCPS; Support for the proposed new Belmont School.Northern Westminster8:15 10Sarah Fletcher, Westminster School CouncilWCPS perspectives, viewpoints and support for the proposed new Belmont School; support for the proposed new Belmont School.Northern Westminster8:25 5Michael TaylorSupport for the PAR-01.Northern South DorchesterAPPENDIX A
Title: Fwd: TVDSB EPAR 01 delegation Speech : FirstClass Page 1 of 3
5/4/2017 12:44:03 PM
Fwd: TVDSB EPAR 01 delegation Speech
From:Bonnie Williams
Marcus Ryan
Subject:
To:Claudia Wiercinski
Thanks for hearing me.
TVDSB EPAR delegation Speech
No parent pays taxes or sends their kids to school in the hopes of "an efficient accommodation model”. That
IS an administrative necessity, but should not be a Board goal. The Board's goal should be educational
outcomes: educated children ready to participate in our communities.
Some have said that communities are not the Board's responsibility, and I get that. Responsibilities are
divided between different branches of government for good reasons. But, different branches of government
also shouldn’t hinder each other. And closing a perfectly viable, successful school in a community is
hindering that community.
In this PAR you are considering closing schools that do not have declining enrolment, that have high FTEs,
that have good FCIs, that have excellent EQAO scores…Other speakers tonight will give much more
compelling details on that.
But the bottom line is that the plan from the MOE we've all been sold isn't working:
Years of consolidation from small community schools into large remote schools has not delivered improved
Educational Outcomes for our children.
The TVDSB research...Effects of Consolidated Schools... is clear on this. But what ABOUT Westminster,
South Dorchester, Belmont, and St. Thomas?
The current Funding Formula says they don't deserve schools. If it did, they would be funded.
The only way to get funding for those schools is to consolidate.
In other words: find some schools to close so that other schools can be opened.
So this consolidation isn't about improved Educational Outcomes; it's about gaming the system in order to
get schools for St. Thomas and Belmont.
The current MOE Funding Formula forces YOU...to choose one community's school over another. Are the
St. Thomas or Belmont communities more deserving of a school than Springfield, Sparta, or New Sarum?
No.
But they do need schools, and the current MOE Funding Formula says that you should take schools
AWAY from Springfield, Sparta, and New Sarum in order to GIVE schools to St. Thomas and Belmont.
APPENDIX B
Title: Fwd: TVDSB EPAR 01 delegation Speech : FirstClass Page 2 of 3
AND THAT IS WRONG.
The Funding Formula isn’t working for ANY of these communities.You can't even schedule the opening of a
school without first arranging for a government MPP to be present. I know the Education Minister is keen
to show up to every new school opening in the GTHA. But where is she tonight?
I’ll tell you where she is: she’s "engaging”. She’s considering "new approaches to supporting education in
rural and remote areas".
What might these changes be?
Well, if these schools are closed it will be too late for them to find out...
Back when this Board voted unanimously to Save AJ Baker you felt so strongly about the Funding Formula
that you unanimously asked your Chair to write a letter to the MOE expressing your concern that you even
CONSIDERED that consolidation.
Well now you are not alone in this.
Recently the BWDSB and the TLDSB made strong decisions in favour of small rural schools.
Municipalities all across Ontario, indeed both the Rural Ontario Municipal Association, and the Association
of Municipalities of Ontario have sent letters to the Minister strongly expressing their concerns.
Your own association, OPSBA, has taken a position that the Funding Formula needs to be changed,
especially with respect to rural schools. But the time for position papers, strongly worded letters, and media
interviews is over.
What is needed is for elected officials: me, and you, to take a stand on this issue.
In January I sat across the table from the Minister and explained to her the problems with this Funding
Formula and why she had to change it. Now it's YOUR turn as Trustees.
Don't be forced into making decisions that are not your own.
Decisions based on MOE policies that are possibly being rewritten at this moment.
APPENDIX B
Title: Fwd: TVDSB EPAR 01 delegation Speech : FirstClass Page 3 of 3
So I'm asking you to do what's best for ALL the students:
Apply for new schools in St. Thomas and Belmont, but don't close schools in Springfield, Sparta, or New
Sarum.
This WOULD be consistent with your own research and with past votes in consolidation debates.
YOU have set a precedent that student outcomes, NOT the Funding Formula would be YOUR priority.
Do the work you always wanted to do as Trustees and stand up for "each students tomorrow every day".
Marcus (mobile)
APPENDIX B
Title: Fwd: My presentation from May 2 : FirstClass Page 1 of 2
Thursday, May 4, 2017 12:43:41 PM
Fwd: My presentation from May 2
From:Bonnie Williams
Daniel West
Subject:
To:Claudia Wiercinski
Hi Bonnie,
Here's the text from my presentation tonight.
Good evening Chair Reid, Director Elliott, Trustees, Senior Administration and guests. Thank you for the opportunity to
address you tonight.
I am here because once again the issue of rural education and how it is administered and funded is once again in the forefront
at this board and across the province. Having previously been a part of the old ARC process I was curious to see how the new
PAR process would play out. I attended a number of meetings for EPAR 1 as well as a number of community level meetings
through the process. The old adage, “the more things change, the more they stay the same” came to mind very early on in
the process. The process itself has changed dramatically, for better or worse, but the underlying elements and driving force
behind the PAR has not.
Senior Administration has put together a very good proposal for you to vote on. The business case they have put forward
will, I expect, do exactly what it says on the label. If you vote to accept the proposal as it is the proper boxes will be ticked
to cause money to flow from Queens Park to build new schools and renovate old ones. At the expense of three communities
who are very happy with the schools they have. At the end of the day this is a business plan, a plan that addresses bricks and
mortar, dollars and cents, and ease of administration. No other quantifiable, verifiable data has been presented as to why this
is the optimum plan to go with.
Where is the data to show that these changes will improve the educational outcomes for students? What data shows that this
configuration will lead to an increase in parent involvement? What studies demonstrate that communities that currently
walk to school will perform better once they are bussed to school? What research has been done to show that the school size
chosen for these communities will result in lower incidents of bullying? I heard during the meetings that TVDSB has schools
of varying sizes that do well academically...have the schools in this PAR been sized to achieve the highest academic outcome
possible based on the demographic they serve? Will the proposed school sizes result in higher math literacy rates? Do
students score better in reading tests in schools of the proposed sizes? It’s been said that larger schools provide more
opportunity to be on sports teams, but where is the data showing that a higher percentage of students actually participate in
a broader range of sports at larger schools vs smaller ones? Is there an elementary school size that results in a higher
percentage of post-secondary graduates?
Why do we not see any of these ideas or concepts addressed and used to support the business plan that has been put forward?
I realize that the board needs to access capital funding from the province, and that this is the only way the province permits
that money to flow, but why is the fiscal argument the only one presented, with little more than lip service paid to all other
factors surrounding the education of our children? I know that dollars and cents are easy to measure. Money is crisp and clear
and precise. I know that the factors I've mentioned are messy. Humans can be infinitely variable and don't fit clear
categories. It's a full on research project to measure what I'm suggesting rather than a simple accounting exercise. But should
we not be sizing and placing schools based on our ability to create the best possible outcomes from and for the students?
In fact, the more I think about it the more I wonder about how good the final proposal really is if the only metric that is
counted is money. In EPAR 2 it takes only 2 schools with one closure to affect annual savings of over $600,000, while in
EPAR 1 it takes 12 schools with five closures to attain an annual savings of only $400,000. Even with all the changes there
are still 4 schools that do not meet the board’s prefered model of JK-8 configuration. Perhaps if we acknowledge that PARs
are about nothing more than money, we could throw off the shackles that are preventing us from creating a more efficient,
APPENDIX B
Title: Fwd: My presentation from May 2 : FirstClass Page 2 of 2
economically streamlined model for facilitating students at the lowest cost. Wipe the map clean of existing schools and use
hard and cold numbers to place schools where they are the most economically viable, sized to maximize the benefits that
flow from the funding formula and staffed in the most administratively effective manner.
Of course, in case anyone is unsure, I am being facetious. I would much prefer to see schools designed, placed, sized and built
with student achievement, outcomes and the well-being of the community they serve as the primary driver. If that means
that we as a society have to pay a bit more to have a better result for our children and communities, so be it. The thing is, at
the moment we don’t know the true cost of the best possible education because money is the determining factor in how our
education system functions. Will there be a board that is willing to put the dollars and cents in second place to achieving the
best possible outcomes? Will this board be willing?
Thank you.
Daniel West
Sent from my iPhone
APPENDIX B
Presentation to TVSDB May 2/17
Mr. Chair, Trustees and Staff,
I am here tonight to bring you the Municipality of Central Elgin’s official position. We received
delegations from all committees that are in our Municipality as well as arranging an informal meeting
with all groups at the same time in order to understand their individual positions. We had hoped that
this would bring them to a consensual agreement.
The report from your staff crossed and affected all 5 Wards from Belmont to Port Stanley and somewhat
divided our Council. In the end after much discussion and debate we agreed on some principles. Three
resolutions were forwarded to you previously outlining position.
First and foremost we fully support a new School in Belmont. This has been under discussion by the
board and our Council for over 10 years. The 2 schools that would be closed, South Dorchester and
Westminister, have overwhelmingly supported this. There is growth in the community and there will be
more in the very near future. In fact at the public meetings this was possibly the only item supported by
all groups.
As to the other recommendations in your report, concerning our other 3 schools we respectfully request
that you put this on pause and review all available spaces from New Sarum to Sparta to Port Stanley and
include other schools in St Thomas and Southwold.
The policies of the Province in planning of New Schools are based on today and not the future.
This would appear to go against all generally accepted planning practices. It projects the
nonflexible policies of the Ministry.
The last thing we need to see is a new School built with portables added on when there are
perfectly good spaces in existing buildings.
Mr. Chair the dynamics of our area are undergoing unprecedented changes and growth. The housing
market in the GTHA is providing the opportunity for families to leave that area and they are showing up
in groves. Even by the busload to purchase homes. One subdivision in Port Stanley that was registered
just under a year ago has 73 lots spoken for already. In fact the builders are being pressed to keep up to
the demand. That is just one example of many as developers are lining up to register new subdivisions in
Central Elgin. Undoubtedly this will have an impact on the needs for spaces in schools. To quote a well-
known Canadian, Wayne Gretzky “A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey
player plays where the puck is going to be”.
Finally Mr. Chair, The demands that you are faced with are indeed difficult and we recognize
that. We know that the Ministry has provided you with guidelines that I previously stated are
non-flexible. We understand the financial restraints that you are under. Having said that I cannot
stress enough that the choices you make must always keep the children’s needs first. We must
provide them with the best environment and the best tools to succeed. Our future depends on it.
Respectfully
David Marr Mayor Municipality of Central Elgin
APPENDIX B
Par presentation to the Board May 2, 2017
As a teacher at Sparta Public School for 26 years, as well as 4 years at New Sarum P.S. and 3 years during
the beginning of French Immersion at Wellington Street Public School, I believe I have a good
understanding of education in rural communities as well as French Immersion. I am also Deputy Mayor
of Central Elgin and a County of Elgin councillor.
Firstly, schools in rural hamlets and villages are vital to the health and vitality of their communities. The
schools act as a gathering place and a place where the children and families develop friendships and a
sense of community. Rural schools of 300 pupils are ideal in size for teaching, offering all programmes
and getting to know every student. The students also get to know every teacher and their fellow pupils.
Parents and grandparents are also very involved in their schools as volunteers. Sparta P.S, New Sarum
P.S. Port Stanley P.S. and Springfield P.S. are all vital to their communities. None of them should be
closed. If they are you will lose many of the parent volunteers due to distance and no sense of
community. The province needs to relook at its funding model. Sparta is at the average cost per pupil of
the Thames Valley Board so cost is not an issue. The Auditor General’s report to the Province
admonished them for replacing perfectly good buildings with new ones. He said it was a waste of
resources. Keeping our rural schools as they are is a benefit to our environment. All of these structures
are only 50 or fewer years old and are still very viable. In Sparta, the school is the newest public building.
There has been a school in Sparta since 1820. Education has been a major emphasis in Sparta since it
was settled.
Secondly, busing costs have not even been considered in the proposals. Why not? We all know that
busing costs go up every year and with the new carbon tax it will be doubling in the next year according
to the bus companies. Closing schools that are in the centre of their catchment areas and busing the
students, two or three times as far makes no economic or environmental sense. Sparta, New Sarum and
Springfield are in the centre of their catchment areas. Busing students from Sparta to Port Stanley will
more than double their time on the bus for most students and then busing students to Sparta for French
Immersion will also add greatly to the busing costs as well as adding more greenhouse gases to the
atmosphere. Students in hamlets and villages can walk or bike to school but the administration’s
proposal will stop all walking and bicycling to school. Spring was always an exciting time for the students
as even those from Union rode their bikes to school as Sparta Line is a very safe road to ride on. This is
not the case if they are moved to Port Stanley as Sunset Road (Hwy 4) is too busy a highway for students
to ride along. Eight years ago, the Thames Valley Board took over 180 students out of Port Stanley and
moved them to Southwold because it would reduce their bus time by 5 minutes. This made Port Stanley
unviable leaving only 100 students. Now you are proposing to move Sparta, Springfield and New Sarum
students and increasing their bus times by 20 to 30 minutes. This is contradictory to your policy 8 years
ago.
Finally, if French Immersion is an important programme in Thames Valley, you will look at offering it at
the west or east ends of Elgin County due to the great distance to the centre. Many students in the west
are keen on being in the programme but are unable to take part as the bus ride is over one and a half
hours twice a day. That is not viable for any student let alone primary aged children. Placing another
APPENDIX B
French Immersion School in the centre does not solve this problem and makes no sense. West Elgin
Secondary School has been threatened with closure due to its low enrollment. Using it and the Senior
Elementary School in West Lorne would make a great French Immersion location and make better use of
the buildings already there.
Thank you for listening to me and allowing me to speak to you tonight. As trustees you have the final say
and keeping our rural schools where an excellent education is provided is vital. Please keep rural schools
open.
Sally Martyn
APPENDIX B
The Garden at Sparta is a parent engagement
initfatfve that’s been in the works for four
years. I’m proud to say that 47 kids signed up
to be in our new garden club. It’s shaped like a
peace sign in honour of our village’s pacifist
roots, but it also functfons geometrically. It’s
designed for the layout to rotate by a quarter
turn each year so that sectfons can be planted
in rotatfon for good soil health.
The garden is the beginning of a food and envi-
ronmental literacy program at Sparta where
students can practfce curriculum based learn-
ing by compostfng and growing vegetables for
the school nutritfon program. As school council
co chair, I think that’s pretty important.
The approval for the garden was rescinded this
year because the school was under review, but
then we got the news that we could go ahead
with it. I feel like some of you in this room may
have had a hand in that, and I just want to say
a deep and heartielt thank you.
APPENDIX B
Telling people that this review is about enhanced
programming optfons, which is what our binders say,
is just bad faith. It’s being done to strip the schools
from rural communitfes, because educatfng kids in
masses cuts teaching costs. This map shows how the
schools are distributed currently with most of them
clustered in urban areas.
This is what it will look like afler, once all of the rural
schools are gone. Note the lack of teaching space for
students from new build subdivisions. Since one of
the parameters of this review is equality, I have to
ask you: Is that equitable?
The answer is obviously no. Everyone should have
equal access to educatfon.
In rural areas, nearly all the families are homeown-
ers who pay property taxes including the educatfon
levy. In urban areas, 45% of people are tenants who
do not pay property taxes. All of the schools will be
gone from areas where everyone pays into the edu-
catfon system and there will only be schools in areas
where half of families don’t. The issue is very polar-
izing because it makes financial sense. Educatfng kids
in masses avoids dilutfon of resources. That’s the
consolidatfon model.
APPENDIX B
It reminds me of when I worked at the CAMI factory
and they had these guys called tfme study guys
whose job it was to overload each work statfon with
more parts so they could reduce the number of line
workers. It wasn’t about quality, it was about cutting
costs, and the consolidatfon model isn’t about quali-
ty of educatfon. It’s about cutting teachers. $413.000
in savings in this review come from having the same
number of kids with fewer teachers. It’s the princi-
ples of the assembly line applied to educatfon, only
instead of auto parts, they’re shuftfing around chil-
dren.
It’s also eerily uncannily similar to the Pink Floyd vid-
eo for “Another Brick in the Wall,” you know the one
where they show kids in desks advancing down a
conveyor belt to huge corrals of students to be
taught in masses? It’s a good video, you guys should
watch it again.
But the Ministry of Educatfon is changing the funding
formula. They’re holding a series of input sessions
including one this month in Thedford. They want to
know what could be done to better utflize schools. I
have a suggestfon. The process needs to change so
that public input comes before the Initfal Report. So-
lutfons could be put to the trustees who could then
direct administratfon to cost out the more promising
ones. Then we could have a conversatfon where ide-
as like offering the voluntary optfon of enrolment at
Elgin Court to Mitchell Hepburn Families, or imple-
mentfng the k-8 dual track at Port Stanley that both
of those communitfes asked for, or allocatfng the
holding zone to Sparta could be properly evaluated.
- Sparta Catchment area
- New Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone
63 pupil places currently exist at Sparta, enough for
most of the students from the holding zone. You have
existfng capacity that can be utflized. It’s already on
the bus route. Do you really want to throw that ca-
pacity away?
APPENDIX B
Instead we have one massive, complicated recom-
mendatfon to convey to the community. I wish
someone from planning had to come to my
hometown and tell them, “Sorry guys. No more
schools in rural areas. I know you all pay into it but
we need to educate in masses to cut teachers.”
That’s the informatfon that we should have in our
binders. And that’s the debate that the province of
Ontario has not had. No attempt to utflize existfng
space at rural schools has been made. They’ve just
been written off, and the problem with that is it’s
extremely environmentally unfriendly.
The most practfcal thing to do with surplus space
is find a way to use it more effectfvely. The pupil
places at the closed schools disappear from the
funding formula, but they won’t vanish from reali-
ty. They’re like a plastfc water bottle that when
you’re done you toss it, like litter on a greenspace,
and it just stays there wile the grass grows up
around it. You could have reused it, it was no-
where near the end of it’s life cycle, but instead
you tossed it out like litter on the lawn, and that is
what planning is asking you to do with our
schools. Can’t we make this work without throw-
ing away existfng teaching spaces? Can’t we at
least discuss it?
APPENDIX B
Keeping Mitchell Hepburn overcapacity instead of ex-
amining a partnership with Elgin Court helps the busi-
ness case. So does keeping the holding zone unsettled
instead of allocatfng it to Sparta. And keeping the
French Track unresolved instead of implementfng the
k-8 dual track strengthens the case for closing rural
schools.
Never mind that it’s a French attendance review fol-
lowed by a temporary solutfon of 7/8 dual track at
Port Stanley followed by a temporary solutfon of the
7/8’s at Sparta followed by another French attend-
ance area review. There’s not even enough French
overflow to fill a second school, it’s only 189 students
by 2023, but if they can make the case that a rural
school has to close to form the second French school
then that’s one more school that’s on the chopping
block in the goal of stripping the schools from rural
communitfes.
Parents are watching carbon footprint these days, be-
cause children are the ones who have the most to lose
from climate change. Governments are recommend-
ing green technology retrofits to schools instead of
building new. Everyone is repurposing old resources.
Ideas that are rooted in an ethics of care for the plan-
et will succeed while ideas that are rooted in old
school arbitrary resource consumptfon will fail.
APPENDIX B
The government is introducing measures to slow
the housing market. That will effect the sales of
new build homes and the enrolment yields from
new subdivisions. People who have an interest in
selling those homes will tell you that they need
new schools cause that’s a selling feature, but
1100 existfng surplus pupil spaces have value
too.
Using finite tangible resources like steel and con-
crete to solve intangible problems is out dated
thinking. It’s moving a mountain to fix a molehill,
when the obvious solutfon is to fix the molehill,
or in this case, the funding formula, and the min-
istry of educatfon is doing that.
Exploitfng resources to educate kids in masses to
cut teachers is just wrong. That’s the debate we
should be having because it’s happening in 600
rural schools across the province and it hasn’t
been debated yet. When that is the goal, saying
that it’s being done to provide enhanced program
optfons is bad faith, so please hold off on closing
Sparta untfl we see how the rest of the chips in
this equatfon fall. Let us grow our environmental
and food literacy program. It’s so important, our
children need it more than ever. Find a way to use
your current resources, and let us keep at least
one rural school in Sparta. Thank you.
From Ontario’s 5-year Climate Actfon
Plan
APPENDIX B
Hello, my name is Sarita Vandernaalt and I am a parent of two Sparta School children and have been a
member of the Sparta Sub Committee. As a community, we don’t understand why Port Stanley’s needs
are more important than ours. But we have not given up hope. We don’t believe that you became a
Trustee because you wanted to close schools. We believe that your intention is to make sure all
students are well served. With that in mind, I want to share some what if scenarios with you that will
show that rushing to move our children puts their safety and mental well-being at risk, negatively
impacting their ability to learn and grow.
What if the funding doesn’t come for a new St Thomas school?
If the 2016 government’s distribution of funds is any indication of what is to come, then the new school
will not be funded and the over-capacity situation remains for an indefinite amount of time. As the
move from Sparta to Port Stanley is not contingent on the funding for the new St Thomas school and the
fact that no immediate relief has been offered to Mitchell Hepburn through their many over-crowding
years even though there is a school within walking distance that has available pupil places, we have little
confidence that an over-crowding situation is of any real concern to Senior Administration. This means
that our children will be in a village with limited access points and high traffic volume for an indefinite
amount of time.
What if the anticipated population growth in Port Stanley doesn’t materialize and families stop moving
to the Sparta catchment area due to the loss of a community school?
So far the “Port Stanley Harbour Economic Development Plan” targeting the “retiring boomer
generation” has been very successful. In the 2011 census, 59% of Port Stanley's population was
over the age of 50, in comparison, Central Elgin had only 41% of their population over 50. We
believe this trend will continue, especially in light of Port Stanley being one of Canada’s six
Retirement Hot Spots as reported by the Globe and Mail in 2015. I believe that the 2016 census
will show an even greater disparity.
The Sparta community will be severely compromised with our hub removed and if enrollment
projections not only don’t materialize but actually decrease then what? Will another rural school be
closed? Will the spend of $1.5 million on upgrades be for naught?
What if French Immersion students don’t make Sparta their permanent home?
In the 2015 Pierre Elliott Trudea Area Accomodation Review, the majority of parents supported a move
to Port Stanley. Since Trudeau is not included in this review and therefore won’t have a voice until next
year, we believe another school will actually be used to house French Immersion long term. This means
that their students could move twice – once to Sparta and then to their long term school. This also
means that the Sparta Public School building could sit empty for years. A wasted resource.
What if the bus ride for our children is greater than an hour each way?
Senior Administration has indicated that bus times could not be estimated due to the potential for new
students or students departing. While I agree it would not be 100% accurate, an attempt could have
APPENDIX B
been made using 2015 data. Proposing to move children to the very edge of a catchment area, deserves
to have all impacts measured and spoken to. I believe that long bus rides will be a factor.
What if rather than more opportunities for our children, what if less actually exist?
Currently in Sparta, we have a large number of clubs, sports teams and musical opportunities. In a
larger school, fewer of our children will make it on sports teams, limits will be made to the number of
people in clubs and teacher participation could decrease due to the stress on their end of working in an
overcrowded school. Our children may not find their love of acting or music or sports.
Who does this serve?
Certainly not the Sparta students who will have fewer opportunities and longer bus rides. Not the
residents of Port Stanley who are going to have to contend with increased traffic for years. Not the
residents of Sparta who will have their community hub disappear. Not the French Immersion families,
who haven’t had a voice this year, last year didn’t want to come to Sparta and still aren’t getting their
permanent home. Not the board which has to spend $1.5 million to accommodate us at Port Stanley.
Not Mitchell Hepburn who is still over crowded until maybe 2020. So who?
The impact to our students is great. They deserve to know that the people responsible for educating
them and keeping them safe throughout each day did everything in their power to make a wise decision.
Our community strongly believes that with all the missing information and the high likely hood of any
one of our “what if’s” materializing, moving our children now does nothing to help them only to harm
them.
We ask you to be bold, be courageous, be wise by putting our children’s needs first. You don’t have to
close Sparta, certainly not now with so much on the line and so many pieces of this puzzle unknown. So
I ask you…What if you vote to keep our Sparta Public School open?
APPENDIX B
Hi, My name is Ruby Denniss,
Thank you for this opportunity to tell you how
my friends and I feel about Sparta Public
School………..WE LOVE IT!
I’m now in grade 4, and since JK, I’ve had many
great experiences at Sparta. I’ve had School
trips to Circle R Ranch, Pearce Williams and
have gone to high school plays. I’ve been in 3
Sparta plays myself …….101 dalmations, Annie,
and Cinderella. We have a Christmas Concert
every year and we all love being a part of
those.
APPENDIX B
My family and I have attended all the family
dances. It’s great to have fun with all my
school friends and their families. I’ve
competed in cross country, and played on the
basketball, volleyball and soccer teams. I’ve
also become a better swimmer with the swim
to survive program. Another thing that we all
love about Sparta Public School is our big
playground. It’s great to have enough room to
play all different sports and games.
APPENDIX B
This year, a very nice lady donated enough
Eukelele’s for the whole class…..now I can play.
She even had the Uke’s of Hazzard play for us.
Her son’s went to Sparta, as well as many other
great people from our community, such a s
Drew Leyburne, who is a Rhode Scholar.
Bigger isn’t always better, unless you are
talking about Ice Cream Sundaes from Shaws!
Sparta is a smaller school and we are all closer
to each other because of that. We get to know
each other very well, we are like a family.
APPENDIX B
When someone is having a hard time, we help
each other out. We do that for everyone.
Sometimes new families come to our school
that are having hard times, and we try our best
to help them, because we all have hard times.
My friends and I don’t understand why the
school board wants to move us out of our
school to Port Stanley so that French
Immersion can move into our school. The
Grade 7&8 French Immersion students are
already at Port Stanley. We think it is a better
idea, less trouble and less money to have the
rest of the French Immersion move there and
keep us where we are.
APPENDIX B
We are trusting the trustees to do what’s best
for us and the whole community. My parents
tell me that’s why they voted for you. Please
don’t let us down. Let us stay at Sparta school.
Thank you
APPENDIX B
Presentation to TVDSB Trustees – for May 2, 2017
ePAR-01
Hi. My name is Ashton. I’m a grade 7 French Immersion student at Port
Stanley Public School. Before I came to Port last September, I went to
school at Pierre Elliott Trudeau. It was pretty crowded, but my friends and I
were happy there.
Being moved out of your school to go to a different one feels scary. Some
of my friends were really nervous about coming to Port Stanley. But once
we were here, we saw how big the yard is, and how many cool things there
are to do – like the Amazing Race in September, the Annual Easter Egg
Hunt, playing in the band, Chess Club, sports, and all kinds of cool events
like Holiday Concerts, Arts Nights, and Innovation Week.
The new students who come to Port Stanley will see all of that for
themselves. And they’ll see that the change will be a good thing. Even if it
doesn’t feel like that right now. It was a great thing for the grade 7s and 8s
in French Immersion.
A few weeks ago, I met Corbin and Owen who are with me tonight. The
Learning Support teacher walked with us through Port Stanley so we could
put together a couple of videos. We wanted to show you, and the new
students coming to our school, what a great place it is, and what a great
community Port Stanley is.
We want you to know that making sure Port Stanley Public School stays
open for lots of students to enjoy, is really important to us. Thank you for
your recommendation. A permanent school for French Immersion is
important too, but we’ll talk about that next year (smile).
Here are the videos we put together for you. Enjoy!
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
1
Port Stanley Public School
TVDSB PUPIL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW
School Council’s Perspective
During last year’s Attendance Area Review for French
Immersion, you heard our concerns about Port Stanley
Public School. For 10 years we have waited for a long
term solution to give our residents the faith they need
in our school’s viability. Young families have been
choosing French or Catholic education rather than risk
their kids being in a school likely to close due to low
enrollment.
Status Quo – Disadvantages for PSPS
Our English track numbers are too small
Lack of sports teams, clubs and extra-curricular
opportunities
All classes are split grades
Fewer opportunities for staff collaboration as one
teacher works independently with two grade levels in
the English track with no other teachers in the school
teaching those same grades
Janet Palmer
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
2
THANK YOU!!
School council would like to thank the Planning
Committee for listening to our concerns last year. While
we didn’t get the solution we were after last year, we
now see the positives in that decision as we are moving
towards the long-term solution we were after much
sooner than we could have hoped.
Supporting the Recommendations of ePAR-01
The Planning Committee’s proposal to accommodate students from Sparta PS
at Port Stanley PS, is supported by the Port Stanley PS Par Committee and
community
It solves an ongoing issue at our school of low student enrollment due to fear of
closure created by our small attendance area
The entire Sparta PS student body will remain together
Port Stanley is large enough to support both school populations
Port Stanley has the space and municipal services available to accommodate
anticipated growth in our community.
Boundary – Attendance Area - Issue
Port Stanley Public School’s current attendance
area too small.
The proposed change in our attendance area
means that many students living closer to Port
Stanley PS than Sparta will have less distance to
travel to school.
Janet Palmer
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
3
The French Immersion Perspective
The French Immersion program wishes to
remain at Port Stanley P.S. until an option for a
permanent solution can be offered
The French community is looking forward to
participating fully in next year’s Attendance
Area Review for French Immersion in Elgin
County
Port Stanley Public School is a vibrant
and active learning environment
Port Stanley Public School has demonstrated the ability to make a transition work effectively from our experience this past fall in welcoming
French Immersion students. The credit goes to our students, teachers, staff
and administration who worked hard and listened to concerns expressed by students and parents. They provided the support system to improve and ease this transition. While it has gone well, and we will miss the French Immersion community, we look forward to welcoming new students to our
school who will enrich every grade and every classroom.
We understand how difficult change can be. We feel confident that if we can make it work between two very diverse student groups, we can work through any challenges arising from the amalgamation of Port Stanley and Sparta Public School
Thank you
Janet Palmer
APPENDIX B
Good Evening
My name is Lisa Rattray and I am the Chairperson of the
Mitchell Hepburn School Council.
Urban and rural schools have many similarities and
ultimately we all want the same thing. A quality
education for our children in a safe environment and we
want that education IN OUR COMMUNITY. We do not want
to be bussed when we can walk. We want a school in a
location we have a connection with, not one that is 5, 10
or 15 kms away.
The south east section of St Thomas has been steadily
growing for the past 10 years since we broke ground for
Mitchell Hepburn. I was there on a very foggy morning in
October 2007 when a group of students, parents,
trustees and Thames Valley staff gathered in the middle
of an empty field to break ground. I remember thanking
the trustees for their forward thinking toward this soon to
be developed quadrant of St Thomas. I expressed our
excitement that we would be receiving a new school in
our community. It is with that same excitement that I
stand before you now. That large empty field is now filled
with homes, families and children and additional fields
are continuing to be developed. Families have built and
bought homes there because of the quality reputation
Mitchell Hepburn has in the community. We are known for
innovative thinking, awesome staff and a caring,
welcoming environment.
WIth the addition of hundreds of families in south-east St
Thomas, over-crowding at Mitchell Hepburn has resulted
in several concerns. These concerns include:
APPENDIX B
Inability to hold special events such as graduation on site
because if the graduates invite more than 1 or 2 people
we exceed the fire code. This for many families means
one or more parent may be excluded. As a School Council
our goal is engaged parents within the school. It is made
extremely difficult when we have to either limit the
number of people that can attend or separate the
primary, junior and intermediate divisions. This tends to
deter parents and families from being involved, especially
if they have a child in more than one division.
Historically, we have had classes sharing different parts
of our facility such as the gymnasium. As our population
has grown we have had to combine gym classes up to
50-60 students in a gym class. This places a strain on
scheduling, teachers, and students. This would be 25-30
if we were not over capacity.
We do not currently have enough parking for our staff
and volunteers. School staff should be able to come to
work and not be concerned where they are going to park.
This also takes away from our welcoming environment as
parents or guardians who come to volunteer at the school
have difficulty finding parking spaces.
On days when the ground is extremely wet and muddy,
our students are confined to the tarmac which has
insufficient space. Picture 350 students at a time with
insufficient space simply waiting for the bell to ring. The
students do not have enough room on these days to get
the physical activity they need during recess time.
Students in our 5 portables have to run through the
pouring rain and blowing snow just to use the washroom.
Students will “hold it in” to avoid inclement weather
APPENDIX B
which, is unhealthy. The students in the portables are
also separated from the rest of the student body, thus
affecting the unity of our facility.
While a number of these issues and concerns may
possibly be resolvable in the short term with bussing, a
bussing solution is not a long term solution and will have
far more negative impact on students and families. The
optimal long term solution to address these issues at
Mitchell Hepburn and prevent them at other schools is a
new school in St Thomas.
We strongly believe it is unnecessary and damaging to
the community in the long term to bus our children out of
an area that has the development capabilities of this
area. Any plan or proposal which focuses primarily on
cost cutting and reduction is short sighted. Parents
vehemently do not want their children to leave the area
for school and we DO NOT support any plan that sees our
children bussed outside of our community. We instead
encourage a plan which considers long term investment
in communities and children’s education. The families of
Mitchell Hepburn strongly SUPPORT the creation of the
new Southeast St Thomas School.
Thank you.
APPENDIX B
Good evening Trustees. My name is Marian Knelsen and I am the parent of two children at New
Sarum Public School in JK and Grade 1, and a future student who will start next September.
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak on behalf of our school here this evening. We
understand that you have a very difficult decision to make and that you are working within the
confines of a challenging funding formula. We trust that each one of you became a trustee to
ensure that the students in Thames Valley, “our children” have the best possible educational
experience.
Sometimes it make sense to close and consolidate schools, however all the reasons that the
ministry and TVDSB state they close and consolidate schools don’t apply to us. Senior
Administration states that when a school has excess space because of low enrolment, the
excess space still costs money to staff, maintain and operate. New Sarum is at 97% utilization
with a stable enrolment projection. We do not have empty pupil spaces! Senior Administration
states that through consolidation our students will have access to a wider range of programs
and courses and will have access to specialized support services, as well as sufficient
enrolment to support sports teams and other extracurricular activities. However, when we
asked for specific examples and evidence to back up these claims, nothing could be provided.
Yes, our children would have a brand new shiny school building to call home daily; however that
is not important to our families, especially when one is already projected to be overcapacity.
What is important to our families is that our children are thriving at New Sarum due to the ample
programing, support services, and extra curricular opportunities that they already receive for
great learning to take place. Which I will remind you is evidenced through our positive EQAO
scores that exceed Board and Provincial averages. We look forward to sharing more details
about each of these areas with you this evening, as well as our family’s stories and personal
experiences with New Sarum PS.
We understand that the best business case for receiving funding for a new Belmont and South
East St. Thomas school includes closing New Sarum. We understand that those areas need
new schools and we support them, but we do not believe that our students are needed to fill
those pupil places, as you will hear through our presentations!
It has become evident to us that the driving force behind the recommendation to close New
Sarum is to fix issues that exist elsewhere. No successful school should be closed to fix a
problem elsewhere! No evidence has been provided to us to suggest our children will receive
any increased opportunities and we will demonstrate to you this evening that they may actually
lose out on current opportunities should you support the closure of New Sarum Public School.
Two years ago, my husband and I very deliberately bought our “forever home” in the New
Sarum school district because we had heard only great things about the school, and our
experience has lived up to our expectations. We are taxpayers that should have the ability to
send our children to a rural school if that is what we choose. Please consider carefully all the
presentations you will hear this evening and keep our school open!
Thank you!
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
1
New Sarum Public School:
PARC School-Level Feedback
Kate Hurst (PARC member)
Parent of Students in Grade 1 and JK
Senior Administration states that “key to the
pupil accommodation review is
consultation with community
organizations, municipalities, school
communities, and the general public”-
EPAR-01 FSAR, 2017
Results of the NSPS PARC
•Used a variety a methods to reach out to the parent/guardian
community to obtain their feedback about the ISAR (meetings, online
survey, Facebook group discussions)
•Found recurring key themes were reported from the community
•High level of response and engagement from NSPS families and the
larger community with previous or current connection to the school
•Vast majority of NSPS families (living in the county and the
city) wanting the school to remain open
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
2
Survey
“At New Sarum, the EQA numbers show how wonderful the staff and their abilities are. What you
can't see in numbers is what a wonderful job they are doing with the children’s social skills and
personal development. We are also very concerned with longer bus times. Our kids already have a
long day and dragging it out with unnecessary bus hours is not fair to the children or their
parents.”
“We live in New Sarum and really appreciate how close the school is to our home. The hours of
operation work very well with out family situation. The sense of community and support is
outstanding and we fear that will be lost with the changing of schools.”
“I am concerned about disrupting their [students] relationships with staff and friends; a longer bus
ride; how my kids will fit in at a city school and participate in extra curricular activities when they
have to catch a bus …and that they will be overlooked or viewed by staff as an inconvenience
given the higher volume of students and resulting demand and pressures on staff.”
Petition
•256 signatures on the online petition
•Pen & Paper surveys were available at the New Sarum Diner, Family Flowers,
Dowler Karn and St. Thomas Huron Tractor
•Total signatures = nearly 600 supporting NSPS remain open
•Support from Central Elgin Council and MPP Jeff Yurek to keep NSPS
open
Key Recurring Themes
•Don’t understand why NSPS was included in the EPAR-01 based on the criteria
•Families purposely bought homes in the NSPS attendance area in order to have their children attend NSPS
given it’s respected reputation in the community and/or because it is a rural school with rural culture
•NSPS offers a large breadth of programming and students are not missing out on opportunities
•Families resent their children being displaced from their school to inflate numbers to form a critical mass of
students in new attendance area
•MOE is manipulating school boards and Trustees into unfairly closing schools in order to maximize a flawed funding formula
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
3
Why was NSPS included in EPAR-01?
•MOE/TVDSB provided criteria on which they base decisions about
school closures
•NSPS does not have empty pupil places. Enrollment projections are stable
•NSPS offers a wide variety of programming and extracurricular
opportunities for students JK-8. Additionally, there is a sensory room
available and a Transitions class for senior students is housed at NSPS.
•Families at NSPS have been vocal that they do not want the school to
close
Rural Schools Matter
•Many families have intentionally chosen to live within the NSPS attendance area
•Mainly rural students attend NSPS and this is reflected in the culture that has developed in the
school. There are high rates of parent and grandparent volunteerism and many staff are
members of the local community
•The students at NSPS are equally entitled to an education in their community as urban students.
The majority of our students should not be displaced to St. Thomas in order to repatriate a
minority of students to St. Thomas
•NSPS families from St. Thomas did not indicate they wanted to see NSPS close or that they
wanted their children to attend the proposed SES school
Opportunities at NSPS
•None of the families we heard from raised concern that their children are
missing out on programming opportunities
•In fact, families resoundingly reported that they believe students benefit
from a wide variety of programming and extracurricular options that they
may not be able to participate in at a different school
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
4
The SES Quandary
•Tremendous housing development occurring in this area of St. Thomas which
suggests an impending critical mass of students is on the horizon
•Likely that, if the recommendation goes ahead as proposed in the FSAR, this
school will be overcrowded and the NSPS students will lose out on
extracurricular opportunities critical to their development and the close-knit
community they enjoy at NSPS
•Families are worried that the overcrowding and space issues Mitchell Hepburn
is challenged by will be repeated in the SES school
Politics of Education
•Much of the focus of EPAR-01 has been on maximizing a flawed funding
formula that is concerned with empty pupil places- this does not apply to
NSPS
•NSPS students are proposed for displacement into two attendance areas that
require our pupils to inflate numbers that should strengthen the business
case to secure capital funds for new builds in Belmont and SES
•When business and politics over-shadow student wellbeing we need to
press pause
Conclusion
•Families at NSPS overwhelmingly support our school remaining
status quo. Including the families that live in St. Thomas
•Our students benefit from the rural culture they experience at
NSPS and a strong sense of community
•The recommendation for closure is not inline with the criteria
school boards are encouraged to apply. There is steady, stable
enrollment projected at NSPS for at least the next 10 years
•Our school should not close. Please use your vote as a way
to recognize schools that are working will not be sacrificed
for political or minor monetary gains in this school board
APPENDIX B
Good Evening Senior Administration and Trustees, my name is Ron Fish and I have three
children currently attending New Sarum. My wife and I both grew up on farms in rural Ontario.
Separated by 600km we decided to put down roots in my rural area of Elgin County. We chose
to reside within the New Sarum school district because of its admirable reputation and quite
frankly, an urban school was not an option we wanted to consider for our children's education.
We wanted to pass along our strong rural roots and raise our kids in a country setting, where
they could attend a rural school!
I have many concerns with the FSAR but tonight I am here to focus on educating you all about
the extracurricular opportunities our kids at New Sarum are already afforded and why
accommodating them in a new school will not offer them any improved opportunities.
Senior admin states that school boards generally: “consolidate and close schools to enable
improved educational options and opportunities for students” 1
The ISAR states that some of the potential improvements of a school consolidation may
include:
• Specialized facilities;
• Sufficient enrolment to support sports teams and other extracurricular activities; and
• Accessibility features2
It notes with more staff there are more volunteers to commit to supporting a wider variety of
extracurriculars.2
Do you actually believe that closing New Sarum will truly provide our kids with increased
extracurricular opportunities?
All of the research we have completed points to “no”. In fact, we can argue that our children
already have more than that of the students attending some of the newest schools in St
Thomas!
When we asked Senior Admin to provide us with the increased extracurricular opportunities our
students would benefit from at their accommodated schools, we were told it is not possible to
know in advance.3
Let's put it in perspective, the new proposed SE school is slated to have 1 spec ed room, 1
gymnasium, 1 library / learning Commons, 1 general Arts Room and 1 learning support room
ALL of which New Sarum School already has. In addition to this our school is fully accessible,
has a sensory room, a green screen, a transitions class, a music room and plenty of green
space for our students to play and learn outdoors, including a baseball diamond, soccer field,
long jump pit, basketball court, and plenty of play equipment including an accessible swing for
our students in wheelchairs!
New Sarum already has all the proposed learning rooms, programs and space that the new
school is to provide, and SO MUCH more!
APPENDIX B
At New Sarum, ALL kids are able to participate in a robust extracurricular program and we have
plenty to choose from at the JR and SR level such as Volleyball, Basketball, Soccer, Cross
country, Track and Field, band, choir, bible and environmental clubs, to name a few. We know
there was school that had more than 50 kids try out for a sports team this year and all but 15
were cut.
How is this fair to our children?
How does this demonstrate improved opportunities for students?
At New Sarum we have the ability to include everyone and they are trained by passionate
instructors, who are our engaged staff, who volunteer their time to facilitate these opportunities
for our children. All of our kids are able to participate at school, so in circumstances when
community sports are not an option due to affordability and other reasons, at least they get to be
a part of our team! Evidence shows that involvement in extracurricular activities actually
decreases as school size increases (Coladarci & Cobb, 1996).4
Have you heard about New Sarum's Husky Café? It is an amazing breakfast bar that is offered
every morning, and all are welcome regardless if they've already eaten or not. It is a non-
judgemental place to have a healthy snack or meal, where kids can develop stronger
friendships and build diverse relationships with their schoolmates and staff. It is an opportunity
to ensure we are giving our students a nutritious start to their day; which will improve their ability
to learn; stay focused in class; and give them the best chance for success. Our parent and
community members volunteer in excess of 25 hours per week to this important program. I am
one of those volunteers. Every morning we feed on average 75 students various fruits and
veggies; muffins, bagels, cereal, yogurt, smoothies, eggs, and even pancakes on Friday's! I do
believe most schools run their breakfast and snack programs quite a bit different than New
Sarum! We are extremely lucky to have amazing parent and community volunteers to support
the Husky Café!
In conclusion, the New Sarum community thanks the Thames Valley School Board for currently
offering our children an above average education with plenty of extracurricular and club
activities to choose from all inside the walls of a safe and encouraging learning environment!
We are definitely proud to be Huskies! Thank You
1- http://www.tvdsb.ca/planning.cfm?subpage=301169
2- http://www.tvdsb.ca/files/311677/final%20isar_epar-01_revisedall-dec07.pdf
3- http://www.tvdsb.ca/files/311677/2017.03.03_New%20Sarum%20PARC%20Q%26A.pdf
4- https://umaine.edu/edhd/wp-content/uploads/sites/54/2010/05/Coladarci-Cobb.pdf
APPENDIX B
Good Evening Trustees,
My name is Wade Fitzgerald and I am the parent of a son who is entering Gr 1 and a daughter
who will be starting Junior Kindergarten in the fall at New Sarum Public School.
I myself am from a small community in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. With about 1000 people, this
small community school had 600 people from primary to grade 12. I was able to play multiple
sports, knew all of my teachers (who most of them taught my parents) and was able to thrive in
a positive, safe environment.
My wife and I specifically chose New Sarum because of the outstanding reputation it has, and
continues to hold to this day. It simply reminded me of my education and thought it would be
ideal for our future kids. I was excited for the journey our children would have as huskies and
knew their educational opportunities would be wonderful, but what impressed me even more is
the “family feel” I felt when picking my son up from school. Everyone seemed to know his
name……..and likewise he knew theirs!
Our school community agreed that it would be fitting to hear from a student who spends 7 hours
a day, five days a week, at New Sarum and tell you what it is all about.
Akadia, is a Grade 6 student at New Sarum who is brave enough to stand up here tonight and
wanted her feelings to be heard. She has taken the time to write this speech which I will gladly
read on her behalf:
Hello, I am Akadia Ndur and I would like to share with everyone my memorable student
experiences at New Sarum Public School. Currently I am in 6th grade, and I am totally
loving it! My home is considered to be right on the borders of Mitchell Hepburn and New
Sarum for zoning. When the Mitchell Hepburn school was just opened my parents got to
choose between having my brother and I go to the new school or to remain at New
Sarum. My parents purposely chose New Sarum for the more “Rural school” feel, and
that still shows every day to be a great decision. The community feel of our school is
something other schools could only dream of. One issue that I have heard my friends at
other schools talk about that negatively affects them is bullying. This current social
concern of bullying is close to non-existent here at New Sarum. Walking into school and
almost everyone knowing your name is the best feeling. Here at New Sarum it feels like a
family. Our activities where we can get the whole school involved are so fun. Everyone
participates in our funny and wacky events. Also our acre and a half of yard space is
somewhere that our whole school can fit and play around on our field at recess. Our
music program is also top notch. We all pretty much have our own instrument and from
grade 5 we start playing songs! Our technology at our school is second to none of the
schools in the area. There is a whole bucket that holds 10 chromebooks in each
classroom. Every classroom has a smart board and at least one iPad. We really do luck
out on the amount of devices we have. Something that I am always looking forward to are
the huge dances that New Sarum puts on. Everyone from grade 6 to 8 gets to participate
in the best dance around. We have loads of dances each year with a food booth, strobe
lights, and great music. On the same note our grade 8 graduation is truly a huge
production. First Grade 8’s fundraise for a weekend at Celtic camp all together. Then the
ceremony of awards and speeches and ending the night with a walk to the New Sarum
diner down the street, a great dinner, and a final grade 8 dance. The grade 8 graduation is
APPENDIX B
extraordinary and something nobody would want to miss out on. Also the choice of
activities at our school are great. There are tons of things for everyone including Husky
Council, Environmental club, year book club, and many more. There is always some sort
of activity that a student can sign up for and that's not even including all the sports that
our school offers. Knowing that I can sign up for the sports I like to play and almost
always makes the team gives me confidence. I have a cousin who has to go through 3-4
rounds of cuts just to play school sports. Finally I would just like to share about how my
brother a former graduate from New Sarum is doing great in high school. He is an honour
student who understands all of the work and assignments. Almost all the kids from New
Sarum are doing great now in high school. Although my graduating class will not be
affected if there is a closure of New Sarum I still hope and wish that the school that I am
lucky enough to graduate from will continue to run for many years to come. I hope that I
can come back to New Sarum and be happy for the next generations, and look back with
many happy memories., I
So, as you can see New Sarum offers numerous opportunities for students to be successful,
inclusive and involved in their school community. New Sarum has a projected steady enrollment
and is a thriving school community that offers numerous extracurricular activities for its students.
It has an excellent breakfast program, ample green space for the children, as well as a transition
classroom.
In closing, I strongly value the education that our children receive. We as taxpayers, voters and
members of a strongly valued community know that you will think long and hard about the
decisions being made here. Don’t close the doors of New Sarum, it is a school that is rich in
culture, student success and has so much value.
Thank You.
APPENDIX B
Good evening,
My name is Neil Clarke and my family and I live in Central Elgin with our 2 children who
currently attend New Sarum public school. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to our
concerns of the proposed closing of what we strongly feel is an outstanding rural school.
Our family lived in Summerside in London for 16 years. Both my wife and I having grown up in
small communities and attending rural schools ourselves, decided early on we wanted our
children to have this same type of upbringing. We were not able to facilitate a move out of the
city in time for our eldest daughter so she attended Tweedmuir for her JK year. This 1 year
period reconfirmed our desire for our children to attend a rural school. There are distinct
differences between urban and rural schools, their community, and the overall school culture.
Our school research included visiting schools, speaking to teachers, people in the community,
reviewing EQAO scores, and considering bussing logistics which we are within a 4 min
proximity to. For this reason, in October 2015 we moved out of London to start our life in a
country setting in Central Elgin with our children attending New Sarum PS and it has provided
an excellent learning environment. We participate in the YWCA before and after school
program, and attend numerous school functions that celebrates a high level of family
participation. What we hear from most families we have now had the pleasure to meet, is they
too made a deliberate choice to move out of the city to have their children attend a rural school,
one they chose based on the community, enrollment, and educational performance. After only
2 years, we are confident we made the right choice for our family.
Fourteen months later we found ourselves participating in this EPAR process that has
designated the school our children have a sense of belonging to as recommended for closure.
With our school at almost 98% capacity and all the other information we have learned it is hard
to comprehend the reason New Sarum would be considered for closure except to strengthen a
business case to help support building 2 new larger schools in St. Thomas and Belmont. Senior
administration speaks to demographic shifts and more families settling in urban areas. While
this is true, and those areas deserve their schools; many families, such as my own, also make
decisions to move away from urban areas, and we are also deserving of our school. Especially
a school such as New Sarum.
One of the most important decisions a parent makes is where their children will go to school and
be provided the best education their situation will allow. In this current environment, how is a
family able feel confident in making decisions for their children to attend a particular primary
school if fully viable schools are being considered for closure?
This current EPAR proposal is set to dismantle the rural school settings in Central Elgin and will
leave no options for families in our area to be able to CHOOSE to have their children participate
in a rural school community and the unique opportunities and culture they provide.
Trustees, some additional key points that should be noted about New Sarum school in your
decision-making process.
Location of school; (New Sarum is in a great location within Central Elgin, and it’s
important to note it’s the only school recommended for closure that is not being declared
surplus, which would lead me to believe it is a perfectly viable school building)
EQAO scores
APPENDIX B
o In our research of EQAO scores New Sarum PS has outstanding scores
compared to the other schools in Elgin County and above average for the
TVDSB. I would suggest this be considered as an example of a school who
provides high levels of education, especially in the area of math
The children of New Sarum have a very large greenspace and playground, something
that urban schools are often lacking, allowing for outdoor sports and proper separation of
the age groups during outdoor play.
This is a full school that has been open for decades with the projected enrollment to
remain that way in this EPAR report. Through this process, you have learned that the
majority of students and their families do not want this closure.
I would respectfully caution the board of trustees from being convinced this is an all or nothing
proposal to form a successful business case to the ministry of education. There are a lot of
moving parts mostly due to the size of the geographical area and number of schools involved.
This is the first time this new EPAR process has been implemented, and in our opinion included
far too many schools.
In closing, with all the information being presented here tonight and in the final public report my
family asks all trustees to vote against EPAR-01 in its current form and direct senior
administration to use this information to reformulate a plan that addresses the issues in St.
Thomas and Belmont excluding the closure of the New Sarum PS and its students.
APPENDIX B
Good evening trustees,
I stand before you tonight as a parent of three children that attend New Sarum, in grades 1, 2,
and 3. I speak on behalf of numerous other families in our community that share with me the
same questions and concerns as we look to the future of our children, and not just to that of
their education but also their mental health and well-being.
My name is Allison, and I have a daughter with Selective Mutism. SM is an anxiety disorder that
is diagnosed when a child consistently does not speak in specific social situations, especially
school.1 A rare disorder affecting approximately 1% of children in elementary school, likely you
have never even heard of it.1 We were fortunate that our daughters JK teacher at New Sarum
had. Fast forward four and a half years, after intense and ongoing counselling, she has just
recently started whispering to a small group of peers at school, including me. It has been heart
wrenching as a mother to watch my daughter silent all of these years. What has helped, has
been the ongoing support from all of the staff at New Sarum. It has helped that she has been
able to attend a smaller school where all the teachers and kids know her, where she is still
included and has less chance of being bullied for her anxiety. If you the trustees vote to close
New Sarum, my daughter will be re-zoned to the proposed new SE St Thomas school. A school
approximately twice the size of New Sarum, where she will be separated from some of her
speaking buddies. A move that I fear will set her back greatly from her accomplishments to
date, as her anxiety grows larger to match her surroundings, all the while trying to make new
friends and develop relationships non-verbally. As a parent I know that a larger school is not the
answer for my daughter. I will have increased concerns about her well-being and safety in a
larger school, and I know we will have to look at other options, possibly outside of the TVDSB
should New Sarum close.
The Board states that through school closure and consolidation, potential improvements include
a wider “availability of specialized support services.” 2 We argue that the specialized support
services available at New Sarum are already meeting and exceeding our children's needs, and
they would lose these benefits at their accommodated schools.
For example; the sensory room at New Sarum was created by 2 EA's, who recognized a greater
need to support students struggling to manage their emotions. This is a resource that has
helped many students be successful in school through opportunities to engage in mindfulness,
physical and occupational therapy, and a safe space to release emotions. It was successfully
established without any financial support or extra resources from the Board. We have been a
model to other schools who have been able to create their own sensory room similar to ours. A
1 year pilot project designed to equip elementary schools with fully functional sensory spaces is
outlined in a 2017-2018 Budget Discussion Template, in which Trustee Skinner states “this will
promote positive learning and work environments and will promote physical and mental well-
being which is necessary components to fostering a high level standard of student
achievement.”3
New Sarum is also home to the Transitions Class which accommodates intermediate students
who have complex mental health needs and specific treatment plans. There are only 5 such
classrooms in all of TVDSB. The ability for these students to be accommodated in a smaller
school setting is beneficial because it allows for consistency from staff, and supports the
relationship building that is often required to support success in school. The geographical
location of this classroom both in the school and in the community of New Sarum is ideal to
Alison Fish
APPENDIX B
accommodate these students and their unique needs. Our teaching and administration team
have a reputation in the broader community for providing these students with the support and
skills they require to experience academic success, and in the transition back to a community
school. The efficiency of this program is greatly dependent on the right combination of
knowledge, skills and environment.
Also just this year some of our staff introduced mindfulness and calming through different
breathing techniques, stretches and focus to the primary grades. The feedback from the
teachers was extremely positive, hence making Mindful Mondays, a weekly assembly for the
students in our gymnasium. The school has been able to purchase some calming classroom
resources and there is now a mindful committee within the school to take on some additional
projects.
It is no secret that mental health amongst our children is becoming a growing concern. The
Canadian Mental Health Association estimates that 10-20% of Canadian youth are affected by a
mental illness and it is increasingly threatening the lives of our children.4 The board also has a
strong focus on our children's mental health and well-being, as outlined in the Growing Mentally
Healthy schools strategic plan.5
The recommendation to close New Sarum is without a doubt economically driven. Our students
will not be benefiting from the same or have any increased resources or opportunities that they
don't already have at New Sarum, as I've just discussed. We argue that when the economic
benefit is so slight and the overall disruption to children is so great, that the well being of our
children MUST take precedence. The boards first commitment as leaders in public education is
"keeping the needs of all students at the forefront during the decision making process.."6
Keeping New Sarum open will be putting the needs of students first, and fulfilling the Board’s
mission, vision, and commitments.
Thank you!
1 - https://www.anxietybc.com/parenting/selective-mutism
2 - http://www.tvdsb.ca/planning.cfm?subpage=301169
3 - https://twitter.com/JakeskinnerPhDc/status/835141224428417026/photo/1
4 - http://www.cmha.ca/media/fast-facts-about-mental-illness/#.WP5rHGkrKpo
5- http://www.tvdsb.ca/files/300557/mental%20health%20strategic%20plan%20pdf.pdf
6- http://www.tvdsb.ca/board.cfm?subpage=9
Alison Fish
APPENDIX B
Dear Trustees,
My name is Morgan and I thank you for having the grace to listen to our heartfelt stories and
our justification to keep our school in New Sarum open. I’m happy to speak on behalf of
many of the families of students that live within the St. Thomas area, and are lucky enough
to be part of the New Sarum school zone. Senior Administration states that the St. Thomas
kids need to be moved into their community. I am here to share with you that many families
in St. Thomas purchased their homes specifically because they fell within the New Sarum
boundaries, and New Sarum is their school community. Doesn’t that tell you something
about this school?
In addition to that, the proposed school is only slightly closer to their homes than New
Sarum. New Sarum is approximately 6 km from their home, while the proposed school will
be approximately 4.5 km from their home. Looking at the whole picture, we struggle to
understand how this is a relevant argument to close New Sarum.
My family and I just moved within the New Sarum boundaries in February. Before that, our 5-
year-old son attended a school in central St. Thomas. The difference between these two
schools couldn’t be more marked. We looked for years for the right property for us that would
bring our son to a rural school in the TVDSB, because we knew the unique culture that
existed in these schools. We wanted the warmth, tight community, childhood freedoms and
social experiences a smaller school and rural setting can offer. I grew up at a small grade
school with around 300 students, and can honestly say that it helped shape my self-esteem
and identity at a critical stage in life. Small schools afford the opportunity for children to be
recognized for more than just academic or sports achievements. In a small community, there
is TIME and SPACE for kids to be noticed for the smaller skills and traits that help grow a
person- the kind child, the great speaker, the playful friend, the kid who makes great bubble
letters, and the one who has the most fun at school dances. All these little joyful differences
and abilities that will never earn a trophy or a scholarship, and that may easily get lost in the
press of 600 plus students.
There are arguments being made in this PAR process saying that large schools offer more
opportunities to families and students than rural schools- I can’t speak to these arguments in
anything but a very personal manner: and RURAL SCHOOLS OFFER MORE! There is
value here that goes beyond a simple dollar sign.
There is outside play-space with grass, and room to run and explore nature. At New Sarum,
there is an incredible amount of community and parent interaction. Children and staff notice
a new student, and go out of their way to welcome him into their number with excitement and
curiosity- his very first day, EVERY teacher we passed on our way out of the school greeted
my son BY NAME and wished him a great first day!
Our previous school was so busy, they didn’t have time to spend on an “easy” child like
mine- that’s a direct quote from our parent-teacher interview. At New Sarum, the teachers
IMMEDIATELY took the time to notice his skill levels, and to encourage him to “do more”
and stretch his boundaries.
At our previous school, we couldn’t do field trips, because there were so many little ones,
and not enough parent volunteers. At New Sarum, there are plenty of involved parents. At
the big school, I helped with student reading under my own initiative, and saw little ones
falling through the cracks already- at New Sarum, I was invited to join the established
reading buddy program- and I get to be part of a team of willing volunteers who help
students grow their skills and joy of literacy- and we get astonishing results!
APPENDIX B
Jennie Orr, another St. Thomas parent, says, “One of the reasons we chose to purchase our
home on the outskirts of St. Thomas 10 years ago was knowing that our children would
attend a smaller rural school. Having that sense of community within a school, everyone
knowing everyone, always greeting and acknowledging my children on a first name basis,
my children are not lost in the shuffle.”
Kelly and Brennan’s oldest child started at a St. Thomas city school. They say they were
“saddened by the lack of community feel, and that they felt no connection” to this school.
This ended up being a major reason that they moved their family to join the New Sarum
community- continuing a beloved family tradition, as that’s where Brennan went to school as
a child! Within a few short weeks at New Sarum, their son had a wonderful teacher,
accommodations and tools to pinpoint and support his struggles. They say that New Sarum
FEELS like a community, one that keeps parents involved and makes the effort to know the
kids on a personal level, and puts in the extra effort towards seeing the kids succeed. Kelly
says that the size of New Sarum PS helps it to feel like more than a school- it is the feeling
of being part of something bigger. Based on their experience, they don’t believe they could
find what New Sarum offers at another school.
The education, the experiences, the opportunities, the community, the open space, the
loving embrace of a village built around the grade school like a little gem being protected-
THIS IS WORTH SAVING!
As this PAR process soon comes to an end you need to be aware that many of us made
purposeful moves of our homes, businesses and families to attend New Sarum Public
School, carefully weighing out the options and choosing what is best for our family. How can
a dollar sign over-ride the careful considerations of a parent’s heart? Our kids are NOT just
dollar signs on paper, nor are the minor savings outlined in this PAR worth closing a school
like New Sarum.
Please keep New Sarum Public School open. Our kids all deserve to enjoy an education like
this!
Thank you.
APPENDIX B
Hi, my name is Danika Sim and I am a former student and graduate of New Sarum Public
School. Thank you for listening to my story. I went to New Sarum for grades 6, 7 and 8. I
credit it's friendly, welcoming, and safe environment for shaping me into the person I have
become today.
Before New Sarum, I went to a bigger school in St. Thomas. In my opinion, being in a school
with so many students had many challenges. It was easy to get lost in the background and get
away with things. With so many students bullying was a real problem! The teachers had to
watch so many kids at the same time, and more often than not I witnessed kids getting away
with bullying and making poor decisions. It was easy to leave the school grounds and go
somewhere else because of its location and I'm sure it was difficult to supervise that many kids
all at once. I didn't even know all the teachers at that school and I can bet that they didn't know
me! Fortunately as a young girl I was afraid of getting into trouble and that was truly the only
thing that stopped me from leaving school property and making the poor choices I saw others
make. Many kids would leave school during lunch breaks or recess without being noticed.
I attended that school for 5 years after which my family moved to New Sarum. This school was
very different from my old school and it benefited me in many ways. New Sarum protected me
and allowed me to learn and grow in a supervised and happy environment. As I got older, I
worried more about fitting in and less about getting in trouble. Without the support and watch-
full eyes of my teachers at New Sarum, my life may have followed a very different direction,
especially at my old school where it was easier to get away with things.
I am not trying to say everyone that goes to a larger school will fall into bad habits, nor am I
saying everyone at a small school will stay out of trouble, but my experience has taught me that
in a smaller school you are more accountable for your actions, you have a higher degree of
responsibility and desire to succeed. You have more teachers and peers to please because
they all know you. This type of environment can be extremely motivating! I received so much
support from all my teachers at New Sarum, both academically and socially. Bullying was much
less of a problem and leaving school property was never an issue because there was no where
to really go and someone would have noticed.
In conclusion I was very lucky to be able to attend New Sarum, as it has impacted my life in
such a positive way! I never felt like I lost out on any programs or opportunities, but rather
gained real life experiences, exceed my educational goals and built confidence to do my best in
all that I do. My hope is by speaking about this amazing school it will stay open and my younger
siblings who are currently in JK and grade 2, as well as all the other children, will be given the
opportunity to grow and learn in this safe and healthy environment just like I did!
Thank you!
APPENDIX B
Dear Trustees
I thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Amanda Mathews and I have two
children who attend New Sarum in JK and Grade 1. I’ve spent countless evenings reviewing
the Final Senior Administration Report presented to you last month to see if I could understand
exactly what the benefits for New Sarum students are. For the trustee’s here tonight I can only
imagine the amount of time it has taken to review that entire report. The decision you are faced
with is an enormous responsibility, and we know you don’t take this responsibility lightly. While
we deal with a flawed funding formula, my children’s school which has steady projections until
2025, and is sitting at a 97% utilization rate is being reviewed for closure. While the Ministry
begins a public input process on strengthening rural education, I’m hopeful that on May 23rd, our
elected Trustees sitting here tonight will make a difference and put the needs of students first.
I’m still not sure I understand why New Sarum is included in this EPAR. It’s pretty clear in the
final report that the recommendation to close New Sarum is simply using these students (my
children) as numbers and as part of the business case to build two new schools.
My children are proposed to attend the new Belmont School. 5 years ago, I moved out of
Belmont to a rural location which I thought had the same school boundary. I signed the dotted
line and then learned that we purchased a home on the “wrong” side of the road, (Ron McNeil
Line/Highway 52). This is the current boundary line for the New Sarum and South Dorchester
attendance areas. I’ll be honest, at that time the only thing that mattered to me was the
convenience of having a school on my direct way to work (I work in London). I had 2 years to
prepare so I had time to educate myself on school learning environments, behaviors, educators,
support staff and programs offered as I prepared to send my oldest off to JK. It was the first few
days in JK at New Sarum that I realized we actually picked the “right” side of the road and that
New Sarum was the best choice for us.
I am only in support of a school in the village of Belmont to consolidate South Dorchester and
Westminster Public schools as they’ve presented and to accommodate their combined
attendance areas. In my opinion the new proposed Belmont school boundary is far too large
and the withdraw of New Sarum’s very few students to this school should not affect senior
administration’s business proposal to request capital funding.
Now I want to switch gears and talk about the proposed Southeast St. Thomas School which
the majority of our New Sarum students would attend. I would like to take this opportunity to
remind you what occurred when Mitchell Hepburn was constructed back in 2008.
At that time a portion of New Sarum, Elgin Court, and Forest Park students were
accommodated at Mitchell Hepburn. In 2014, only 6 years following construction, an addition
was required at this school due to rapid development. In less than 10 years total, that new
school is now over capacity at 113% utilization while Elgin Court and Forest Park are under
capacity at 68% and 80% utilization. We have now just watched that over capacity situation
unfold, while 2 contributing schools are left with empty pupil spaces. Why are we repeating
history and creating yet another overcrowded school that senior administration has told
us will grow to 135% utilization?
The background of the FSAR report indicates that in order to ensure effective accommodation
planning, the board must plan for the future. The FSAR directly comments on creating capacity
in River Heights and Northdale Central Public Schools to allow for growth in Dorchester;
however, are recommending to open the proposed Southeast St. Thomas school at 91%
utilization, with tremendous growth yet to occur in the area.
APPENDIX B
The current proposal to close New Sarum public school is not planning for the future. If we are
planning ahead, 40 years as stated by senior administration for other schools in this
EPAR, why are we not looking ahead in St. Thomas? Moving New Sarum students is simply
a quick fix to solve some of the over capacity issues now and check a box at the ministry level
to show that you have closed a school. A school that should not be closed as we are
demonstrating to you this evening.
The final report indicates the over capacity situation at Mitchell Hepburn is a priority, so
why would you close a school that has steady projections and a 97% enrollment rate to
repeat history?
Its simple, New Sarum Public School needs to remain open. If you include the students of New
Sarum in your proposal to build the business case to the ministry of education and close our
school, you will be creating future enrollment and over capacity issues yet again.
If you leave New Sarum’s students status quo along with its close proximity to St. Thomas,
doesn’t it make sense to leave New Sarum open, thereby avoiding yet another overpopulated
school, (much like the scenario currently faced by Mitchell Hepburn) which compromises our
students safety and well being? I’m not confident that moving these students to a school that
will be in an overcapacity state shortly after it opens is not providing students with an equitable
education. No thriving and respected school should be closed to fix a problem somewhere
else, I’m hopeful that you will have to agree with me.
My kids are very lucky to have the opportunity to attend New Sarum PS. Everyone knows each
other’s name, this climate enables the development of close, meaningful relationships between
staff and children, and between the children themselves. Parents know all the teachers and
admin staff, and these professionals know the whole family. While these relationships may exist
in schools of 500 plus children, I’m not confident. This is important to me and I feel as a parent
(and tax payer), I have the right to choose what I feel is best for my children and what
environment they would be more eager to learn in.
As leaders in our public education system, you have committed to putting the needs of the
students first, maintain this commitment and support the students of New Sarum by voting to
keep this school open.
APPENDIX B
2017-04-27
1
Builder: Community
Input for EPAR-01
By Doug Tarry Homes
•Unprecedented scarcity of new
housing inventory; especially
low-rise homes – only 324 new
detached homes available for
purchase across GTA (March
2017)
•Record high prices! New, single
detached home in the GTA
averages $1,469,449. Average
price of low-rise product such
as townhomes/semi-detached
$1,081,013.
•Unprecedented demand for
new homes
•239 housing starts in the
London-St. Thomas area in the
month of March – compared to
84 in March 2016
•32% increase in single family
home starts
•“Not all consumers want to live
in a high-rise. They want to
live in a subdivision and raise
their families there”
APPENDIX B
2017-04-27
2
Current, serviced lots (92
single, 24 semi units = total
116 dwelling units)
Build out expected before
2020; 256 units
Natural areas/green space
Future development (800
total: 500 units before 2020,
300 in future – expected
approx. 600 units to prop.
Mitchell Hepburn and
remaining 200 units to prop.
new school)
Development land; non-
residential
Martingale Terrace
Bridle Path
Peach Tree Boulevard
July 2014 April 2017
July 2014 April 2017
April 2017July 2014Google Aerial Summer 2015
Boundaries Change but enrollment
stays the same for MHPS
Mitchell Hepburn capacity = 678
Current capacity 113%
New area includes approx. 600
dwelling units of Harvest Run
(expected to be built within the
next 10 years) plus dwellings
currently under construction in
Orchard Park
APPENDIX B
2017-04-27
3
•As a builder, we have seen that
families chose to send their
children to alternative schools
(Catholic, private, French-
immersion) rather than busing
while living in a holding zone;
this will result in reduced
funds for TVDSB
•Doug Tarry Ltd. does not want
to see the creation of another
holding zone
APPENDIX B
Good Evening Trustees, my name is Nathan Taylor. I am speaking today on behalf of my son
Archer James who is 5 years old and currently attends New Sarum public school. I live in New
Sarum but I work in London as a Professional Mechanical Engineer. I highlight this to
demonstrate the “choice” to locate and raise my family in a rural community. I received my
early education in a rural school. I support the New Sarum rural school staying open.
Tonight I am going to discuss briefly some of the additional factors you need in order to make
an informed decision on behalf of the students and parents of NSPS. Your consideration is
drawn not only to the financial details that you have already been provided with the TVDSB
recommendation but some additional discussion surrounding those details. I would like to
ensure that we also recall the TVDSB Pupil Accommodation Policy # 4015. Highlights from the
policy are:
- support student achievement, safety and well-being
- long-term sustainability
The final senior administration report has outlined the parameters of the EPAR-01. This report
has senior administrations structured final recommendations. Since this is the overarching
document for which the decisions are being made in regards to NSPS, I would like to highlight
parameters which are not reflective of the rationale being used for justification of the NSPS
closure recommendation.
According to the final report, senior administration has identified three priority issues to
address with this PAR recommendation.
1) Low enrolment schools
2) Empty pupil spaces
3) Overcrowding
NSPS is not a low enrolment school and has very few empty pupil spaces. Currently the
school has a 97.3% utilization (250 students), which means only 7 empty pupil spaces. A key
determining factor in this decision is with regards to sustainability. The school has been around
since 1969. Enrolment as expected fluctuates with time, but clearly people have been drawn to
the area for almost 5 decades as the school has remained operational through previous
reviews. Our current projections for student enrolment also show that we expect to maintain
this capacity for the next decade as a minimum, out to the year 2025.
The board has invested over the last ten year period, since 2006 approx. $804,932 in
maintaining the facility. It’s important to note, some of this cost is directly tied to reducing
capacity, removing older structures and portables (due to student departure for MH).
Projections show NSPS will require $3,464,094 in renewal needs over the next 5 yrs. When
reviewing the aggregate, this equates to $284,601 annually over the 15 year period. According
to data provided by the board, this is in line with the average costs for maintaining a schools
that are still recommended to stay open.
Equity of programming and allocation of resources. It is understandable that if you have a low
enrolment school, cost of allocating resources to maintain standards will negatively affect the
overall funding profile. As we have just discussed, NSPS does not suffer from low enrolment.
Given NSPS current enrolment and actual cost per student of $1592.30 (board average is
$1416.06), we are operating within 12% of the overall board average.
The board has recommended that moving NSPS students to the two new schools in
conjunction with the new programming will improve the educational experience. We believe
that the NSPS students are already receiving an enhanced educational experience. This is
APPENDIX B
supported by the EQAO (Education Quality and Accountability Office – measure for quality and
effectiveness) scores where NSPS ranks at or above TVDSB and provincial averages.
According to the 2009 study, “the greatest impact on student learning is the quality of
classroom instruction”, NSPS agrees. Look at the data in this regard, NSPS is providing
exceptional quality in all aspects but in particular the scores in mathematics over the last three
years. This past year’s scores showing an outstanding 8% above provincial average for Grade
3, by the time students are into grade 6, 29% above provincial average. It is clear that the
programs and quality of instruction being provided at NSPS are providing the students with an
optimal educational environment.
In summary, I have provided you the following;
1) A confirmation that the students, parents and community would like to make sure
the trustees have heard the message that we desire the New Sarum Public School
to remain open
2) We have reviewed the pupil accommodation policy and confirmed that more than
financial consideration is expected when making decisions effecting childhood
education
3) Additional discussion regarding the senior administration report, final
recommendations and - doubt as to whether we have properly assessed the correct
parameters in regards to the New Sarum Public School being recommended for
closure
APPENDIX B
Good Evening Trustees,
My name is Amy and my son is in senior kindergarten at New Sarum. Thank you for the
opportunity to speak directly to you this evening.
3.5 years ago my husband and I made the decision to move out of the north end of St. Thomas
into a more rural setting. With a 3 year old at the time, much of our decision regarding where to
build our home was based on where our son would attend elementary school. I did not grow up
in Elgin County, and my husband grew up in Port Stanley – neither of us had any previous ties
to the NSPS community. At that time our limited knowledge of New Sarum was gained from
friends and acquaintances who spoke positively about New Sarum. We felt so lucky that our
son would have the privilege of attending a school with such a solid reputation. Having an
awareness of previous school closures, as we were getting ready to finalize our new home
build, I actually recall saying to my husband…there is no chance the Board will close NS is
there? He was confident that NS was safe from closure. Satisfied with his response, I signed.
Moving was consistently reinforced as a wise decision when we would receive comments such
as, Drew goes to New Sarum? You’re so lucky, New Sarum is such a great school. These
remarks came from multiple individuals.
So imagine our surprise when we heard that New Sarum was being recommended for closure.
My initial reaction was that I must have been led astray by all these people praising New Sarum
and that the recommendation to close must be in the best interest of my son. I actually had
conversations with people about how school closures are so contentious, and that most people
don’t understand why they are necessary…ironically, here I stand today…
Fast forward a couple of weeks and the ISAR is released. I began educating myself. Then our
PAR subcommittee was formed and we researched, and engaged in dialogue with our school
community. It quickly became evident that all of the reasons the Ministry and TVDSB state they
close and consolidate schools didn’t apply to NS, as you have heard here this evening. I began
to think that maybe some people don’t understand why school closures are necessary because
in certain circumstances…like ours…they are in fact - not necessary.
Through this process, we have observed a disconnect between the goals and strategies of the
TVDSB and the recommendation to close NS, as you have heard here this evening.
The Board states that key to the PAR process is consultation with key stakeholders; however,
our feedback went largely unheard in the formation of the FSAR.
Senior administration states they need to reduce empty pupil places; however, NS doesn’t have
empty pupil places, nor are our students being accommodated in schools to fill empty pupil
spaces.
The TVDSB desires high achievement in Mathematics as stated by the Director of Education in
an open letter; however, NS math scores consistently exceed board and provincial averages.
Increased programming and extra curricular opportunities are desired; however, our students
already have ample opportunity and senior administration can not provide any evidence as to
how our children will benefit in this regard.
We have heard that our high and urgent renewal needs are an issue; however, they are in line
with other schools not recommended for closure.
APPENDIX B
Senior administration has cited the size of our school at 257 OTG as a driver behind the
recommendation to close; however, the ISAR shows that 25% of the schools within our Board
have between 201 and 300 students.
Senior administration states that reducing the over crowding at Mitchell Hepburn, which
currently sits at 113% utilization, is a priority of this EPAR; however, the recommendation to
close NS includes moving our children into a school that senior administration has told us will
grow to 135% utilization.
Through the EPAR-01 recommendations senior administration has created capacity allowing for
growth in Dorchester; however, is proposing to open a new Southeast St. Thomas school at
91% utilization, with significant growth to occur in the area.
Senior administration states that our St. Thomas families need to be repatriated into their
community; however, many of them intentionally moved into that area to attend NS, and the
proposed school is only slightly closer to their homes, and NS is their school community.
We are all taxpayers and we do expect our tax dollars be used wisely and agree that dollars
should be optimized to provide the most effective learning environments. As we have gone
through this PAR process, it has been reinforced that the education our children are receiving at
New Sarum is of high quality. We fully understand that your commitment to putting students
first, includes all students in the TVDSB, not just ours. Unless we can be provided with specific
examples, we fail to see how NS remaining open could possibly be compromising equity of
programming and opportunities for other students.
From day one our school community has struggled to understand how such insignificant annual
savings warrants such significant student upheaval. Based on an annual budget in excess of
$850 million, the estimated operational savings equate to 0.05% of the annual Board budget.
Closing 1 school in the EPAR-02 results in an annual savings of $628,500. As you are well
aware, the recommendation to close 5 schools (re-purposing Sparta) in the EPAR-01 results in
an annual savings of only $413,300. Yes, we have all heard about the $17M of urgent and high
renewal needs that will disappear with the closure of 4 schools. We want you to be well
informed that New Sarum makes up the smallest percentage of that figure. South Dorchester
and Westminster, who are supportive of the recommendation as it pertains to their school
closures, make up more than $10M of that $17M. You should also be informed that it is going
to cost the Board approximately 25% of the annual facilities costs to maintain our vacant school,
which for NS alone equals almost $37,000 ($36,667) annually.
Closing a successful school to place our children in a school that is going to be over capacity –
all for a 0.05% annual savings, does not make sense. When we asked senior administration
why NS was being recommended for closure we were told that New Sarum was part of a bigger
plan. It quickly became evident that the “bigger plan” was to use our children to strengthen a
business case to receive the capital funds to construct 2 new schools. In our humble opinion,
this and this alone is why NS is being recommended for closure. We ask that you do not allow
this funding formula to force you into a decision that does not put all students first.
In their school level report, the Mitchell Hepburn PAR subcommittee stated they do not believe
New Sarum students are needed to make the case for this new school. Their children are
simply going to be shuffled from one over crowded school to another, while the overcrowding at
MH will not be alleviated. Do you feel comfortable making a decision that places you back in
APPENDIX B
this same scenario? Closing NS would be a significant disservice to our children, Mitchell
Hepburn families and all the other students that will attend the proposed school.
Senior administration has consistently told us that closing our school will offer our children
increased opportunities; however, when pressed for specific examples none could be provided.
If someone…anyone…can provide evidence that demonstrates how moving our children from
NS into a school that is going to be overcapacity is BETTER for their education and well-being,
we are all ears. We are a logical and rationale group. If evidence had been provided we may
have been convinced…however, prevalent throughout this process has been the lack of
evidence to demonstrate how our children will benefit. We don’t need to tell you yet again that
the Board’s own research shows no improvement to student achievement from consolidation.
The solution we have to offer you this evening is simple. We support the new schools in
Belmont and St. Thomas –a need has been demonstrated and their communities are
supportive. However, we also clearly support New Sarum remaining open – no need for closure
has been demonstrated, our community is not supportive, you need our pupil places, and THIS
SCHOOL WORKS. This evening you have heard just a sampling of the many success stories
from our families, many of whom made a deliberate decision to move into the NS boundary.
Over the last 5 months, our school community has proven that the recommendation to close
New Sarum is purely economically and politically driven, with no increased opportunities
demonstrated. Once again, please do not allow this current funding formula to force you into
making a decision that is contrary to your own commitments. We respectfully request that on
May 23rd you make the decision that does put all students first.
APPENDIX B
Hello, my name is John Twinem. I would like to thank you for this opportunity to
advocate for the survival of Springfield Public School.
My wife Jo-Anne and I moved to Springfield almost 30 years ago, prior to the birth of
our first child. In time, we had four children, and we were thankful to experience the benefit of
a small, community engaged school, for them.
Even before our kids began their education, we were able to witness a school vitally
involved in the community, and a community vitally involved at the school. It was more than
simply the young parents whose kids were there. At that time, there was even a group of
senior citizens, many of whom had no grandchildren, who were at the school regularly. Some
were outdoors helping to supervise recess and lunch breaks. A number of older ladies we came
to know, were reading tutors. They were part of helping kids to succeed, in the face of the top
down debacle that was the Ministry of Education’s “Whole Language Learning” program.
Perhaps you remember that. It was one of my earlier opportunities to observe that experts
aren’t always expert.
But I digress . . . over the years, we witnessed the school’s presence at and in
community events like the Santa Clause parade (Springfield has an awfully good one, for a
village of 700); Remembrance Day services; outings and activities hosted by the local library.
And local people from the community were invited into the school to judge speeches and
storytelling competitions, or to read aloud to the kids. I was there a number of times,
personally.
That community buy-in means that Springfield students can participate in a full array of
athletics programs. Volunteers from staff and community co-ordinate efforts to make this
happen. I mention this, specifically, because when much larger centralized schools in the area
could not get the volunteers and staff to offer students the opportunity to participate in junior
sports, Springfield did. That’s because that’s what communities, as compared to
amalgamations, do.
Parking on this for a moment, please consider how that affects who can participate. In
extra-curricular sport, I was able to keep, on the teams that I coached, kids who would have
been unable to play at larger schools. They would have been unable, at the amalgamated
school, for two reasons. First, their raw initial ability and attributes would often have meant, in
the larger school, they couldn’t “make the cut”. Second, the transportation required to a
distant central school for “after school” events would often have excluded low income kids.
My observations are anecdotal, but school studies general bear out this reality. Larger,
more distant central schools disproportionately benefit kids from higher income, white collar,
professional homes at younger ages. They decrease the percentage of students who
participate. And they proportionately disadvantage kids from blue collar, lower income homes.
Springfield is significantly blue collar.
The fact is, Springfield Public School provides a gentler, more supportive launching pad
and a stronger sense of connectivity for the kids, by virtue of its smaller size and its location in
their community. Over the years, I have had this affirmed to me by multiple, TVDSB appointed
principals.
One told me, at a jam-packed Christmas assembly, “I have never been at a school with
the kind of support for events and turn-out that Springfield has.”
APPENDIX B
Another stated “I can’t believe how few incidents and problems there are for me to deal
with. I had a child tell me that she had heard someone use a bad word. I was preparing to be
disillusioned, and then I found out that the bad word was `shut up’.”
The last time we went through this process, my eldest son had graduated from
Springfield into grade 7 at a larger school. I asked what he thought of closing Springfield. He
said to me “Dad, at this new school, at recess we go out and stand around on the pavement
that’s the designated space for grade 7 and 8s. We can’t play on the grass because they say
there’s not enough space, and we’re not allowed to play games with the younger kids.” That’s
one of the schools to which Springfield children will be bussed under the present proposal. I
recognize that recess is not the measure of this decision . . . but quality of experience should be
at least part of it. In contrast, my nephew just recently came to Springfield and is in grade 6
there. My brother’s family just moved to the area and the school. I asked my nephew what he
thought. He said “It’s really nice. The kids are friendly, and at recess, the younger and older
kids all play together and have a good time.” I thought it was funny that he had referenced
recess, remembering my older son’s comment. My nephew had come from a larger, urban
school. He knew what it was to be excluded. But his new experience is what community looks
like.
I recognize that a new school should be built in Belmont, and that South Dorchester
students and Westminster Central students should go to that school. I strongly recommended
that course of action fourteen years ago to this Board in the previous accommodation study—
and was told that combining South Dorchester and Westminster Central couldn’t work. Now
that you’ve realized the rightness of that course of action, don’t add a wrong decision to it. Do
not mandate the closure of this school simply because an enormous, faceless bureaucracy is
offering you a reward to close schools. This decision will damage the fabric of a small, vital
community and it will not enhance the well-being of the students from this community.
APPENDIX B
Good Evening …
My name is Kelly Pearson, and I am a life time member of the Springfield community. I’m 55
years of age, not married, no children. I have no blood relatives attending this school and won’t
have in the foreseeable future. Even though I was born in Tillsonburg I grew up in Springfield
after my fifth day of life, and when you are born into a rural setting you are born into a
community. A community that is there for you and becomes your family such as it is in
Springfield. I recently began my second turn as community rep on the Parent Council. A
position which I first held starting in 1997 when the Parent Council initiative was introduced
across the province. A friend asked me “Why? Why I would consider doing this again?” My
response was “Why Not? Service to others is the rent we pay for our time here on earth.”
You may wonder why I care if Springfield Public School closes since I have had no direct ties to
the school for literally decades. Well, I care about my community!
You see, community volunteering is a way of life for me. Currently I am involved with the
Springfield Lioness Club, the Springfield Family Fun Day Committee and the Springfield Santa
Claus Parade. Within the Lioness Club, our mandate is to assist our community be it seniors,
youth, hearing or sight impaired – in fact anyone in need. We donate to Springfield school on a
regular basis and in the past 35 years we have helped with library needs, the outdoor classroom,
and playground equipment to name just a few. Every Christmas, and if required at other times of
the year, we donate to families in need. Most times those donations are made with the help of
the school as our principal is better aware of the needs of the families. Each June our club
acknowledges the top male and female student graduating students. This recognition goes back
to the 1960’s or possibly earlier when the classes went to Grade 8. The former Springfield
Women’s Institute began the idea, and when they disbanded in 1997 they approached our
organization about continuing it. The Lioness members were happy to do so and this
recognition of merit continues to this day. If Springfield Public School closes, the Lioness
members will not guarantee the level of commitment to another school as our students will now
be scattered. It will be difficult to maintain the same level of donations when there are multiple
schools involved. Some years of our records are lost but from those we do have, our donations
exceed $15,000 to the school not including the needy families and the graduating students.
APPENDIX B
Springfield Family Fun Day is a community day held in June, organized by community members
that is basically a free event for all that attend. There are games, educational events, shows, and
contests. 2017 marks the twenty seventh year of this event and without the inclusion of the
school community we could not continue to effectively offer this annual free day. The
community organizations, churches, school and some businesses are instrumental to the success
of Fun Day. This is definitely a team effort and the students and parent council have played a
vital part in making it a success since the beginning.
Our Village Santa Claus Parade is older than I am. The support and participation by the school
children and parents has been ongoing for all those years. This is an example of another
community event that brings the students and their families together with the rest of the Village.
It is often heard that a school is the heart of a community. Well, Springfield Public School is the
heart and has been for one hundred and eighty years. One hundred and eighty years of formal
education in our village.
In 1836, a Springfield visionary named Joel Burns donated land where our current Post Office
and Pioneer Cemetery are situated. That first school called the “Burns School” opened the
following year and played its part in developing the youth of the neighbourhood, and opened the
way for better things and better education for our children.
There were two more schools built between that first log school and the one that I attended from
1967 to 1973 (Grades one to six). My father was a trustee for that school from 1961 to 1964
giving of his time, as he had two children enrolled and another (me) about to begin in a few
years. Through his stories and remembrances I have an understanding of the obligation and duty
that it takes to do what you do as school board trustees to “place all students first when making
decisions” and “govern the school system in the best interests of its students”.
It is my hope that you can find within yourselves the realization through these presentations that
bigger schools are not always better and that keeping Springfield Public School from closing and
bringing back our Grade 7 and 8’s is the right thing to do for our students. I know it is the right
thing for our community.
Thank you.
APPENDIX B
Hello, and thank you Trustees for the opportunity to tell you why the closing Springfield Public is
the morally wrong choice. My name is Mike Percy, and I build power transformers
professionally... but more important than that is the fact that I am a resident of Springfield, and
the loving and protective father of 2 beautiful children who attend it's wonderful School. The kind
of school that inspires peace of mind.
Peace of mind, is a glorious state of perception. I have tasted it's bliss on occasion and I
remember the power of it lustre fondly. I place a great deal of effort in the quest for peace of
mind. Much of that effort lately has been directed towards the saving of Springfield Public
School, to my astonishment. With all the things in life to fight for, why does this have to be one
of them?
I would never be so bold to believe I can adequately speak for the entirety of my village, or the
the township of Malahide. I can however accurately represent my own family's plight.
For us, the idea we could lose our beloved school is heartbreaking. Out of all the reasons we
left the City of London, and moved to Springfield 2 years ago, the school was the most
important. We live less than a 10 minute walk from the school. Those walks are filled with the
village's beautiful scenery, and pleasant greetings from the other families on their way to work
and learn. The excited cheers of children meeting their friends fill our streets. All while enjoying
the benefits of fresh air, sunshine and exercise.
This is the second school for my eldest child. Before coming to Springfield Public, my daughter
attended a larger London school. As a family with a student with special needs, I know first hand
how underfunded and short handed the support is. I know larger schools have the potential for a
better on site presence because the volume of students creates more money. I know this is how
it should be... but there is a major difference between the SHOULD and the IS.
Try as you might for the SHOULD...
The IS is always what IS.
The truth IS we found it hard to get our "supports" to engage thoroughly in the bigger school,
and in turn, our daughter suffered. Since switching to the smaller school environment, we have
made massive strides in progress towards getting our daughter the help she needs. This made
possible by an environment of caring and attention we hadn't experience before. We have
already noticed how positive this has been on her. Most importantly, she has a reinvigorate love
of education that is inspiring to watch. Our proximity to the school helps us stay as involved as
possible to ensure this. Even with our small school budget and minimal staff, the cooperation
between the families and it's community school has created an environment that I know for a
fact works. My daughter's progress is living proof of that.
However, the EPAR-01 directly undermines these efforts, and all for the sake of bolstering a
business case for a school, not only outside of our community, but in another township entirely.
A school whose supposed, yet seemingly undefinable enhanced programming, my daughter
APPENDIX B
won't even get access to because we won't be going to the newly built facility. Instead, we
become an invading force at a school being pushed to capacity levels its never experienced
before. It may not be crowded on paper, but will it not feel that way to a school accustomed to a
much smaller and manageable size? This kind of situation increases the risk of kids falling
through the cracks. My daughter cannot afford to fall through the cracks. She is coming to an
age where that could lead to devastating effects of her willingness to involve in an education
system that let her down. I know this to be true because I was one of those kids.
My education was so ill-fitted to my development, that it instilled a deep seeded resentment for
it. By High School, few teachers could earn my trust enough to convince me they actually cared
if I succeeded or failed.
That trend continued with my daughter's first, much larger, urban school. It wasn't until
Springfield, and seeing its effect on my girls, that I felt that trust again. I trust Springfield, and
now I entrust you to save it. Be deserving of your elected title. Do the right thing.
APPENDIX B
Hello and Good evening. My name is Maria Smit; Supervisor at Springfield Library
I will begin with a quote from Frank McKenna, Deputy Chair, TD Bank Group:
“Instilling the joy of reading in children is one of life’s great pleasures – it helps
create lasting childhood memories and promotes crucial literacy skills. Investing
in reading and literacy programs is one of the best ways we can help make a
difference in our communities. Through the TD Summer Reading Club program,
we’re proud to foster learning in kids across the country and inspire them to turn
the page of a new adventure.”
The TD Bank Summer Reading Club Program is held at Springfield Library each
summer and encourages children to continue reading during summer vacation.
We promote SRC at the school in May and June. For the past 3 years we have had
just over 120 children registered. During July and August we hosted 7 weekly
programs: 324 children attended and our summer movie afternoons had 63 children
attend. We had a 25% increase in the number of participants from 2015 and 50%
of that increase were Springfield Public School students due to the exposure and
partnership with the school in promotion and reading challenge initiatives. Each
summer we set a goal for the number of books we can read together; last year the
goal was 2,016. Total books read: 2,735! The Springfield Public School
principal would submit to a pre-determined challenge if together the children
reached this goal. Over the years, we have all had fun watching the principal kiss a
pig; being slimed with applesauce; dress like a duck; and we watched all the
students walk from the school to the library carrying a jungle vine…yes, it was
long enough to reach both buildings! These events have encouraged children to
continue to read all summer! The partnership between school and library makes
this program so successful! Several ‘graduates’ of Summer Reading club have
come back to join the Teen SRC and also attain some of their required volunteer
hours for high school.
We are proud to inform you that in the past, with involvement from students at
Springfield Public School our Summer Reading Club submissions to the National
SRC Award were successful! Together we received a 1st place; a 2nd place and
several Honourable Mentions.
The Springfield Library’s Storytime program enables us to establish family
connections during the preschool years. We are able to continue this contact by
participating at the Springfield Public School TVNELP school readiness program.
APPENDIX B
Springfield Public School and Springfield Library partnership has been established
over the years through a variety of programs and events. This has proven to be a
Win/Win situation for both! The children are able to walk with staff and parent
volunteers to their local library for author, musician and class visits; hands-on
learning; as well as literacy based and creative programs including: Forest of
Reading; Summer Reading Club; technology; Ontario Public Library Week;
Family Literacy Day; Art show; National Canadian Film Day! …and More! In
2016 we had 13 class visits with 498 in attendance. Taking the students away
from our community will be the demise of these joint programs. Being in a rural
school provides many opportunities at the local library for all students in all
grades….experiencing learning beyond the classroom.
For the past two years, Grade 1/2 class has regular visits with residents from
Terrace Lodge, a local nursing home. The students arrived at Terrace Lodge in a
big yellow bus, thanks to the generosity of Springfield Lioness Club who covered
the cost. Other times residents arrived at the library by bus while the students
walked. This year the students and seniors are cutting and gluing pictures for a
special Canada 150 project. The relationship between students and seniors has
been great; intergenerational learning is a winning formula! It makes for a million
magic moments. An additional visit with students and residents is planned during
the Library Art Show in June at which time we will unveil the project currently
being worked on.
Forest of Reading, Blue Spruce Award program is a yearly event that focuses on
reading books by Canadian authors to students in Grades FDK to 3. Each year
we welcome Community volunteers from local businesses; churches, Fire
Department; OPP and others who look forward to the opportunity to read books to
the children!
As you can understand by the partnership established between the local library and
school, a small school in a small community has many significant benefits.
Trustees should see small schools as assets and not liabilities. They offer a family-
friendly, community-based model for education that is too precious to lose.
Thank you.
APPENDIX B
Good evening everyone, my name is Amanda and I have two
children that go to SPS, I am a parent volunteer and I also work full
time as a nurse. I am very passionate about rural schools and
keeping SPS open.
I find it strange in this day and age in a country that is so
accepting and adaptable, that we are trying to mold all of our
children into a model that extracts them from our roots of small
rural schools to a city approach of large schools with over 400
students. This orange is the new black approach always looks
better on paper than in reality. Increased resources are promised,
but more children are requiring the resources. If my kids do not
excel in academics or athletics or some sort of club they will not be
invested in school and will run the risk of falling through the
cracks. In a school with more children, it is likely the teachers may
not pick up on this.
We agree that Belmont should have a rural school. They want
we already have. A small school that makes the kids feel safe. A
place where everyone knows your name and parents are looking
out for one another. We have the privilege of walking or having our
kids bike to school. In that time we can socialize with other
community members. When my kids are struggling the teachers
are able to recognize it and work with me to help them improve.
When my kids try out for a school team they are competing against
less children improving their chances of making the team and
improving their self worth and self esteem. Our school and
community work together to support one another. I believe the
parent volunteers and community resources outweigh resources
that may be provided by a larger school. One on one reading with a
parent, going to a local farm to learn about agriculture, walking to
the local fire department to learn about fire safety, walking to the
cenotaph to honour those who fought for our country, being a part
of family fun day, being on the school float in the parade, or walking
to the library where the learning opportunities are endless these
APPENDIX B
are all examples of how SPS students create community in
Springfield. Our local librarians are amazing. They provide
countless programs and resources and make learning fun and
inviting. All of these opportunities could be expanded and extended
to our Grade 7 and 8 students if they are brought back to the
school.
In a research article called “The Hobbit Effect” by Lorna
Jimerson (2006) it was shown that children in smaller schools are
academically more successful have higher graduation rates, take
more advanced courses and participate in extracurricular activities
to a higher degree. She also found that small schools are safer,
kids feel they belong, and teachers have better job satisfaction.
This is what Belmont wants and we do not blame them
because we love what we have. But it should NOT be at the
expense of our school closing! Belmont is already a desirable
location. If you build a school in Belmont people will flock to move
to that area. I imagine in the not so far future that as I drive north on
highway 74 I will be pointing to all the new subdivisions and telling
my children that this used to all be farm land at one time.
With all these new children in the area you will no longer need
the 80 kids initially needed to propose the new school in Belmont.
What happens when our school is already closed? You end up in
you know what creek and I am not talking about Catfish!
The boundaries need to be shifted again and now the kids are
on a bus ride in another direction or put in portables at a new
school; a scenario that seems to be recurring. You say that you
are looking at the future, 40 years I believe it was stated; well this
won’t take 40 years. It is great that you want to build new schools
but let’s not forget that you need to invest in the schools that you
already have open and not let them run down and be taken apart
until it is necessary to rebuild! You don’t buy a brand new car and
not get the oil changed.
APPENDIX B
As a nurse and as a graduate of South Dorchester Public
School, I know the benefits of a small rural school. These include
but are not limited to:
1. The physical well being of walking to school or having large
acreage to play on at recess
2. The mental health benefits of being in a small safe
environment surrounded by friends, loved ones, neighbours
and teachers who all know your name
3. Feeling invested in your school you will want to strive to be
better.
4. Increased chances of being a part of extracurricular activities.
One example that was shared with me was about a Springfield
student competing in cross country. Behind everyone he kept on
running, huffing and puffing all red in the face and as he turned the
corner he saw the runners who had already finished along the
sides of the track and all of his teammates cheering him on at the
finish line. This student was given the chance to compete-he knew
he would not win the race but he finished it with friends cheering
him on.
I worry that if our kids don’t feel like they belong, they will not
do well in school, slip through the cracks and end up doing poorly
in school, hanging out with the “wrong crowd” or end up with
mental health issues of which we have seen to have detrimental
effects on children in our neighbouring community of Woodstock.
When I train a new nurse I often have them relate to the
patient by saying if this was your grandparent how would you like
them to be treated? I know you are supposed to stay neutral and
not get emotionally swayed but just for a moment I would like you to
see how this will affect our students, families and our community as
a whole. If this was your child being taken away from their safe
environment and familiar school and torn between friends and
being extracted from their community. How would you feel if this
was your home and you no longer have a community school. How
APPENDIX B
likely are you to stay or build in beautiful Springfield? If it were your
kids who could no longer walk or ride their bike to school or
participate in local library programs, how would this make you feel?
This affects us all! This decision will not be easy to make but you
are accountable and responsible to ensure the best possible
outcome for our children. Do not make it lightly.
Thank you for your time.
Amanda Shackelton.
APPENDIX B
Thames Valley District School Board
May 2 and 3, 2017
Re: EPAR 01 and the closing of Springfield Public School
By Tracy Goris
APPENDIX B
Good evening Director of Education, Members of Senior Administration, Trustees, and members of the
public.
My name is Tracy Goris and I am here tonight representing the farming side and the effects on
it of closing rural schools.
Let me start by telling you my background. I was born and raised on tobacco farms in and
around rural eastern Elgin County. I grew up learning how to work long, hard hours in many dirty
environments. As I grew up, I took my life lessons learned on the family farm and applied them to
everyday situations. Going off to college, I dreamed of one day finding a mate in life, who loved to farm
and that I could raise a family with that would have the same views and values in life as me. Well 12
years ago, that dream came true. I’ve been married to my husband for 10 years and together, we farm
and are raising our 3 young children on the farmland he and his father have acquired over the last 50
years, since his father immigrated here from Holland. They started with vegetables, moved into raising
hogs, and we farm just over 1000 acres of cash crops together.
The Canadian Agricultural Sector is one of the largest contributors to the Canadian Gross
Domestic Products with over $70 billion in economic activity a year (1), which helps aid in the overall
health and growth of our economy. Farming not only includes farmers but jobs in technology, where
advancements in equipment, like automated milking parlours, help in all daily aspects of farming. Jobs
also include areas of environmental sustainability with things like looking at soil preservation, the effects
of chemicals and pesticides and areas in waste management just to name a few.
1 in 8 Canadian jobs are related to agriculture with over 2.1 million Canadians employed. The
Grain Industry produces 40 000 jobs alone in Ontario. There are 3 jobs waiting for every agronomics’
graduate here (2). Who will fill those jobs you ask? Not kids who are raised in cities and more urban
areas, never having set foot on a family farm.
Ontario has the most farms in Canada. That is 68 000 farms with average farm size being 608
acres (3). 98% of these farms are family owned and operated. 25 000 of these Canadian farm operators
are under the age of 35 (4). These farm families are multi-generational families, living in one area with
deep roots in their land, and they are not going anywhere. Farm families that have young kids, raising
them to be hard workers, living on their land. Rural kids are raised in a different environment then urban
area kids. Rural kids are used to having space to roam, to grow and explore. Busing them off to a bigger,
newer school is not the answer for them. Keeping them in a smaller school has been proven beneficial in
many aspects of theirs lives in the works of K. Cotton’s “Affective and Social Benefits of Small-Scale
Schooling; published in 1996”(5). We like to get our hands dirty by making old things new again and we
make do with what we have; we renovate, not rebuild!
APPENDIX B
People like Chris Hadfield, who is the first Canadian to command the International Space
Station. He credits being raised on a grain farm in rural Southwestern Ontario in giving him the tools and
knowledge to work on machinery long before he received his first degree in mechanical engineering (6).
Stats Canada has posted in the last census that there is a shortfall of people to fill jobs in the
agriculture sector (7). If you are raised on or in a farming community, you are more likely to stay and
work in a farming community. Urban people cannot understand the workings of a farm and the
dedication and commitment it takes. We pride ourselves on our land. You don’t just wake up one day
and decide you want to become a farmer.
There are many times where our kids have been picked up at school in a tractor because that is
what you were driving out in the field when they get sick at school, or you need to drop off a forgotten
lunch, homework, or permission form on your way to the field. Closing our school and transporting our
kids to a farther away community on the edge of a large urban centre won’t benefit our kids or help us
in our daily way of living.
I, as a mother, won’t have the time to commute a farther 40 minutes to help with hot lunches
and volunteer in class with reading and extra math with students. This is proven by Dr. Lauzon and
Ms.Leahy in their study on “Rural Schools and Educational Reform: Should We Keep Rural Schools
Open?” (8). They state that closing rural schools would lessen parent’s involvement in class
volunteering.
The Ontario Federation of Agriculture has stated how “schools are an integral part of the
economic and service infrastructure necessary for prosperity in our agricultural and rural communities”
(9).
In a newspaper article published in the London Free Press on March 29, 2017, (entitled ‘Trustees
to vote next month on plans to shutter Elgin and Middlesex elementary schools’ by Jennifer Bieman and
Hank Daniszewski (10)); Kevin Bushel is quoted as saying “With larger and fewer family farms, rural
population is moving into villages and towns and we are just following them.” I’m one of the
approximately 20 farming families in Springfield P.S. out of 105 families. That is almost a quarter of our
school. They would be disrupted to have their kids bused to a school farther away from their home and
places of work. There are many more families in our community, our village as Kevin puts it, that work
on these farms too; you would be causing them unrest as well. Disturbing their quality and way of life.
Springfield Public School is a part of our farming life, our anchor, giving us piece of mind to know our
kids are being well educated, close to our family homes and being easily accessible if the need arises.
PLEASE DON’T TAKE THAT AWAY FROM US.
Thank you
APPENDIX B
(1) www.talentegg.ca
(2) www.talentegg.ca
(3) www.nationsencyclopedia.com
(4) Crop Life Canada, Agriculture More Than Ever, and the Chatham Daily News
(5)Affective and Social Benefits of Small-Scale Schooling; 1996; K. Cotton
(6) www.wegrowforthe world.com
(7) Crop Life Canada, Agriculture More Than Ever, and the Chatham Daily News
(8) Rural Schools and Educational Reform: Should We Keep Rural Schools Open?
(9) “The real cost of closing rural schools” by Rejean Pommainvile, Director, Ontario Federation of
Agriculture, Oct 28, 2016
(10) The London Free Press, article “Trustees to vote next month on plan to shutter Elgin and Middlesex
elementary schools” by Jennifer Bieman and Hank Daniszewski, Mar 29, 2017
APPENDIX B
Good evening. Tonight I am speaking as a mother of 2 young boys who attend Springfield Public
School and as a member of the village community. When my husband and I decided to buy a
house 3 years ago, one of our priorities was for it to be within walking distance to a school for
our kids. Why? Because as soon as my oldest son started JK, I realized the advantages of being
able to physically drop him off and pick him up from school each day. It gave me an opportunity
to get to know the other parents and other kids at the school and it allowed for me to have
contact with his teachers on a very regular basis. It felt like we belonged to a community. I
compared this to our many friends whose children are bussed to school and it was very evident
that they did not feel the same sense of community or connectedness that we did.
Under this PAR, the families of the Springfield community will be negatively affected by either
now having children bussed as opposed to being able to walk, or by having their children
bussed for a longer distance each day. Senior administration has failed to tell you what the
impact of long bus rides is on children, what effect it has on families or what the true costs of
bussing our students out of their community really are.
Currently nearly 50% of the students at Springfield Public School are within walking distance.
Many parents and students walk or ride their bikes or scooters to the school each and every
day. This contributes to the physical and mental health of our children and also strengthens our
families. Children are out getting fresh air, exercise and for many of them, spending time with
mom or dad as they go to and from school. As a parent, I greatly appreciate connecting with my
two boys during these times. Bussing both eliminates this physical activity and reduces the
amount of time that students are able to spend with their families.
In order to give you a better understanding of how such a change would affect Springfield
students and their families, if this PAR is approved, I’ll use my own family as an example.
Currently, my children and I leave our home at 8:50 each morning and return home by 3:30
each afternoon. Under current bussing times, if my children were bussed to Summers Corners,
they would need to be at the bus stop by 8am and wouldn’t return home until 4pm. This is an
extra 80 minutes away from home and family each day. That equals to 400 minutes a week and
an average of 1464 minutes per month. That’s 24.5 hours of home time my children would lose
each month! Although, these figures are for current bus times and for my children, I assure you
that many of the families at Springfield will feel similar loss, whether it is because their children
will now need to be bussed, like mine, or because their children will now have a much longer
bus ride. In a CTV News interview in January, Kevin Bushel stated that building new schools
would maximize walkers. Yet for our students, where half are currently able to walk, he is
willing to eliminate all walkers and increase bus times for the rest. This is not consistent with
TVDSB’s goals or mission. In order to maximize walkers in our community, we suggest 1) leaving
our school open, and 2) letting us keep our grade 7s and 8s. This would maximize walkers as
well as fill our empty pupil spaces.
The image on the screen is a map of the current catchment area for our school. I’ve drawn a
black, diagonal line in the north-west corner to indicate which part of our catchment is actually
Janette Wall
APPENDIX B
closer to Belmont than to Springfield. As you can see, it is a VERY small corner! There are no
parts of our catchment that are closer to Summers Corners than to Springfield. So, other than
the few residents within that small north-west corner, all the students in our community can
expect a loss of time with their family.
This loss of time significantly affects family routines, and will limit extracurricular activities as
there is less time each day to fit in breakfast, dinner, play and homework, let alone
extracurriculars. As parents we will need to decide which part of our kids’ lives will have to
suffer due to this loss. Will they lose sleep due to early bus pickups? Will they skip breakfast?
Will homework or studying suffer, or will they need to give up an extracurricular activity?
Tonight, we as parents and as members of the Springfield community are asking (practically
begging) you to consider the broader costs of closing our school. We are asking you to choose
what is best for our students and not what is best for Senior Administration’s business plan. We
are asking you to put our students first and keep our school open.
Thank you!
Janette Wall
Janette Wall
APPENDIX B
Janette Wall
APPENDIX B
Environmental Impacts of Closing Springfield PS
Good evening, my name is Peter Rochus, and I, along with my 2 year old daughter, my soon to
be born son, and wife are residents of Springfield. I have been working in the building automation field
for 11 years now, which involves me in making buildings more energy efficient through heating and
cooling equipment control.
With all of the news surrounding us day in and day out, its hard to ignore the issues we face with
regards to the climate. Extreme weather events, warnings from climate scientists, American politics (I
won’t go there…), automobile manufacturer’s cheating their way through emissions tests, and the list
continues on. Its hard to see where the events in our community fit in to the world sometimes, but we
play an important part in the stewardship of the environment.
I’m sure that all of you have heard of the greenhouse effect, but just to give a quick summary
taken from the NASA global climate change website climate.nasa.gov, energy comes from the sun, hits
the surface of the earth, and some of it reflects back and hits a layer of “greenhouse” gas in the
atmosphere. The greenhouse gas layer absorbs much of this energy, and bounces it back into our
atmosphere. This keeps our planet a comfortable place to live. However, an increase in the thickness of
this layer, can lead to more of that heat being trapped. This is what we call global warming. Global
warming is happening because our blanket of greenhouse gas is growing, and trapping more heat in our
atmosphere. One of the main components of this layer of greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide or CO2 for
the chemistry types in the audience. CO2 has been directly correlated in a constant rise in the average
temperature of the earth since 1880. Two of the major contributors to the CO2 are gasoline, diesel and
other internal combustion engines, and building heating, cooling and humidity equipment, which just
happen to be two items that are directly at issue in this PARCS process. Using some very rough numbers,
for the present school, to heat, cool and otherwise power the school would require about 40 tonnes of
CO2 to be emitted per year. 3 school buses, travelling 12kms per trip, 4 times a day would emit about
30 tonnes of CO2 per year, for a Springfield PS total of 70 tonnes of CO2 emitted per year. If 2 school
buses were to travel to Summers Corners, about 8 kms per trip, and 2 school buses were to travel to
Belmont, 4 times a day, this would emit 44 tonnes of CO2. However, there will also be the inevitable
kids that miss the school bus, because they used to walk, and aren’t used to getting up so early, so
approximating 5 kids miss the bus per day that go to Summers Corners, and 5 kids miss the bus per day
going to Belmont and have to be driven to school, this would result in another 50 tonnes of CO2 per
year, for a grand total of 94 tonnes of CO2 per year, if Springfield PS were closed. Just to recap,
Springfield PS open, 70 T of CO2 per year, Springfield PS closed, 94T of CO2 per year. All calculations are
available, if anyone would like to see them.
Beyond the numbers, rural schools have an important part to play in the education of students
and the environment around them. With 5 acres of land, 24,000 square feet of roof, and a location right
in the middle of some of the best farm land in the world, Springfield Public School has numerous
opportunities to enlighten students on several areas that affect the environment. Let’s start with the 5
acres of land. This could be used to install a community garden that allow students to learn the art of
growing fruit and vegetables. They could learn what goes into producing the food that we eat, and gain
a greater appreciation to the inputs that are required to grow 454 grams of strawberries, package them,
and ship them 4000 kms across the United States to our local grocery store shelves. A composting
program could be implemented to take all those cheese sandwiches that don’t get eaten into something
APPENDIX B
that the garden could use. The 5 acres as well as the roof surface of the building could be used for
renewable energy sources such as solar panels and wind generated power.
There are several farms surrounding the area, and several of the school’s students live on these
farms. These would be excellent sites to visit and teach children about farming. The United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that 18% of all greenhouse gases are related to farming of
animals for meat consumption. I want to go off on a short tangent here, but it is related, I promise. I
was at a local farmer’s milking operation the other week, and he showed me his automated milking
machine. I got to see graphs, and statistics on every cow that helped him make decisions about how to
make his operation more efficient. This included the purchase of a robot that pushed feed to the cows
on a regular basis, and there were accompanying trends to display the positive effect this had on milk
production. This kind of innovation and application of technology with farming is helping to make farms
more efficient, and reduce CO2 emissions. This is one of many inquiry based learning opportunities that
are available within minutes of Springfield PS, and every other rural school.
Our generation, and the ones that have preceded us have created the climate issues with the
earth that we are experiencing right now. We owe it to our children, and their generation to give them
all the knowledge and opportunities we can, so they can make the right decisions. While I will admit,
many of the opportunities I have mentioned may be available to a larger city school, a small rural school
can take advantage of these suggestions, and do it better, due to their proximity to some of the biggest
contributing factors to greenhouse gas emitters, and extra space. The small cost to keep our rural
schools open is worth it to me. It is the price I willing to pay for my children and their generation.
APPENDIX B
Calculations:
CO2 Emissions if Springfield PS Were To Stay Open:
About 11,704m3 of gas per year would be used to heat the building, and for DHW (using
www.enbridgegas.com for estimating gas usage), which equates to 23.31 Tonnes of CO2 emitted per
year.
Using an average consumption of 253,617 kWh of electricity (assuming 5.5 kWh per square foot usage,
taken from targets set forth in this report
http://sustainableschools.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Top-Boards-Report-White-Paper-May-2016-
final.pdf ) would equate to 17.27 Tonnes of CO2 emitted per year.
Using the EPAR-01 document, the furthest school bus travels 12 kms, and there are 3 school buses, so
using an average fuel economy of 0.3734l/km (taken from fuelly.com), at 4 trips a day, for a total fuel
consumption of 53.77L of fuel used per day, multiplied by 200 school days, equates to 10,753.92 litres of
fuel used per year, for a yearly CO2 emissions of 29.38 Tonnes of CO2.
Springfield PS Total CO2 Emissions = 69.96 Tonnes of CO2 per year
CO2 Emissions if Springfield PS Were To Close:
Assuming that 4 buses would need to be used to transport 167 students:
2 buses would go to Summers Corners PS, 8kms per trip, 4 trips per day, at 0.3734l/km would equal a
daily fuel consumption of 23.89L of fuel used per day, multiplied by 200, equates to 4,779.52L of fuel
used per year, for a yearly CO2 emissions of 13.06 Tonnes of CO2.
2 buses would go to the new Belmont PS, 19.3kms per trip, 4 trips per day, at 0.3734l/km would equal a
daily fuel consumption of 57.65L of fuel used per day, multiplied by 200, equates to 11,530.59L of fuel
used per year, for a yearly CO2 emissions of 31.51 Tonnes of CO2.
Kids would miss the school bus, so assuming 5 kids were driven by their parents in the morning, and 5 at
night from Springfield to Summers Corners, multiplied by 200 days, would emit 10 Tonnes of CO2 per
year.
Kids would miss the school bus, so assuming 5 kids were driven by their parents in the morning, and 5
atnight from Springfield to Belmont, multiplied by 200 days, would emit 40 Tonnes of CO2 per year.
Summers Corners + Belmont Travel CO2 Emissions = 94.57 Tonnes of CO2 per year
All CO2 conversions done using www.carbonzero.ca.
APPENDIX B
Good evening Senior Administration, Trustees, and fellow community members.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Rebecca Clark. I am a concerned
resident of Springfield and mother of 2 daughters who both attend Springfield Public
School. I would like to take this time to talk about mental health, wellness and not only
the important role that schools play, but the unique benefits that exist in small rural
communities like Springfield. Mental Health is a topic I am passionate about not only
because of my background in Social Work, but because of the profound impact it has on
individuals, families, and communities.
It is well researched and documented that mental health and well-being is an
enabler for school success, and is even acknowledged as so in TVDSB’s own Mental
Health and Well-Being Strategic Plan which includes the vision “to support learning and
development by enhancing the mental health and well-being of students and
staff”(Growing Mentally Healthy Schools, n.d. p5), and goals to “increase mental health
literacy, enhance mental health leadership and strengthen engagement with students,
families and our community”(Growing Mentally Healthy Schools, n.d. p5) and my
challenge to you is how do you think this is reflected in the EPAR-01, especially in the
recommendation to close Springfield Public School?
Currently 1 in 5 children and youth in Ontario have a mental health challenge and
70% of mental health challenges have their onset in early childhood or youth. (Ontario
Ministry of Children and Youth Services) “No other illnesses affect so many children in
such a serious and widespread manner” (Ministry of Children and Youth Services, 2006,
p8). “The potential consequences of mental health issues are significant –including
poor academic achievement, failure to complete high school, substance abuse, conflict
APPENDIX B
with the law, inability to live independently, health problems and suicide, and affect
children, youth, their families, schools, communities, and the province as a whole
“(Ministry of Children and Youth Services, 2006, p8). This makes mental health
promotion and prevention so essential as well as early identification and intervention;
and schools are an important place to coordinate strategies. A community is missing a
big piece of this puzzle without a school. Mental health promotion attempts to
encourage and increase protective factors and healthy behaviours that can help prevent
the onset or reduce risk factors that can lead to mental health issues. In a school
context protective factors include a sense of belonging, positive school climate,
opportunities for success, emphasis on responsibility and helpfulness, norms against
violence, and school achievement (Center for Addiction and Mental Health). Small rural
schools provide this is a concentrated way for students, and Springfield Public School
does it with an incredible presence and support of our parents and community.
The Office of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth in Ontario promotes a
healthy development approach as a strategy for improving mental health and says that
“services should be available where students ARE in order to reduce stigma and keep
people connected to their communities”(Statement on Child and Youth Mental Health,
n.d.; p9). “The advocacy group People for Education argue smaller schools are better
for students: In larger schools, students are more likely to get ‘lost’ because of the
anonymity created by larger student populations” (Ketterling, 2017)This is much less
likely to happen at a small school such as Springfield where parental involvement is
high, and teachers have the ability to know the needs of each student more effectively.
APPENDIX B
Positive youth development approaches promote healthy development through
supportive community environments and connections. At Springfield PS, our students
are engaged with our school, our community is engaged with the youth through the
school, and therefore our students are engaged and well connected with our
community. Everyone is invested to ensure everyone’s well being. Springfield even
has Out There Creative Therapy, a unique mental health organization that reduces
stigma around mental health issues, and provides a creative outlet for our youth and
community. Coordinated and youth friendly communities are important to mental
wellness; therefore, we must create youth friendly communities and spaces that are
accessible and inclusive and that make the needs of young people a priority, as doing
so will make youth feel more supported, connected, engaged, valued and safe. What
message does closing our community school send to our youth?
Young people in rural communities have been known to experience more risk factors
related to well-being than their urban counterparts ( Ontario Centre of Excellence for
Child and Youth Mental Health, 2016; pg6) and an Ontario study even “found that living
distance from school is a risk factor for suicide” (Armstrong & Manion, 2006). When
meaningful youth engagement is a protective factor in mental health and specifically
against suicidal ideation; closing a small rural school is throwing away essential
opportunities to promote wellness rather than escalate risk factors in mental health.
The Ministry of Children and Youth Services state that “the mental health of Ontario’s
children and youth is a shared responsibility” (Ministry of Children and Youth
Services.(2006;p1). It is the responsibility of children, parents, community members,
schools, service providers and policy makers to protect the best interest of our youth.
APPENDIX B
It’s my responsibility. It’s your responsibility. We are working hard in Springfield to live
up to this responsibly and I ask that you do your part. Keep Springfield Public School
open.
APPENDIX B
TVDSB Final Presentation
Out There Creative Therapy
April 24, 2017
My name is Kellen De Vos, Founder and President of Out There
Creative Therapy, a non profit organization that works to
provide creative activities, events and productions for youth
affected by or at risk of mental illness.
When we addressed the Board in February at Parkside, we
mentioned that our organization was seeking funding for a
creative resource space in Springfield for youth through the
Youth Opportunities Fund Grass Roots Test grant stream of the
Ontario Trillium Foundation.
Well, we got the funding. All $209,600.00 of it.
Our three year grassroots project called “Get Out There”, will
experiment with new ways to achieve one of the YOF outcomes
for youth well being that can extend and continue to be funded
after the initial 3 years.
APPENDIX B
We can say happily now we will be maintaining a creative,
multifaceted, rural space for youth like nothing else in Elgin
County. Youth will be involved in not only high end creative
projects, but also have access to clinical knowledge, supports
and programs coordinated in partnership with our organizational
Mentor CMHA Elgin, on the prevention and education of mental
illness, recognizing the value of both clinical and creative
resources and their intrinsic value using them hand in hand to
support youth in leading a healthy, happy life.
In a world where mental illness has become an epidemic
affecting 1in 3 Canadians, this new program would be a
concrete resource for junior students that attend Springfield
Public School to get involved with through creative and fun
ways, to learn about mental illness with CMHA staff, mental
health champions and artistic professionals of all kinds.
The Ontario Federation of Agriculture January 2, 2001 paper
“Rural Schools and Educational Reform: Should We Keep Rural
Schools Open?” states:
“Failure to acknowledge school /community relationships
negates the potential role the community may play in the
educational function. A community can serve as part of the
curriculum where it can be examined in its history, its economy,
APPENDIX B
its ecology. It becomes a living laboratory through which
students learn.
It’s a source for the development of entrepreneurial skill,
leadership, development, and a sense of civic responsibility. It
gives the children a context in which to develop seeing the
potential of their own community.
“Get Out There” co-creative activities include video, comedy,
dance, music, drama, and art. Documentary and fictional films
will be created with Toronto based 1308 Pictures, (who have
worked with Nike), and other youth based initiatives - seeing
what they want to create and seeking out the resources needed to
make their dreams possible right here in Springfield, where there
rural roots are!
If Trillium believes in Springfield, it’s youth and Get Out There,
we ask that you will too.
We see Springfield Public School and “Get Out There” as
partners; with walkable events and projects to be held at both
locations. In fact, we would even suggest the Board’s
consideration of bringing Grade 7 & 8 back to our community.
Junior students are at a perfect age to learn about things that I
wish I had learned about as a tween - like psychosis, the effects
APPENDIX B
drugs and alcohol can have on the brain, depression, addictions,
all mental illnesses. Creatively students will be able to engage in
a variety of mediums and gain new knowledge as we are
equipped professionally to foster specific creative interests that
students bring to us, offering them training, equipment and
professionals they need to express themselves in a positive and
beautiful way.
Get Out There will walk hand in hand with Springfield School.
If Trillium can invest so substantially in Springfield and Get Out
There, we hope you can see the value in giving our kids an
opportunity to learn, in depth, about how to lead mentally well
lives - and we believe that includes finding a voice creatively
like never before in Elgin County.
We are all creative beings. Einstien once said, “Imagination is
more important than knowledge.”
We want nothing more than to work in partnership with the
school to foster both knowledge and imagination in our children.
I'd like to end with some poetry. First is an excerpt from a poem
about poems…. A portion of a piece from William Carlos
Williams: "That concerns you and concerns many men. Look at
what passes for the new. You will not find it there but in
APPENDIX B
despised poems. It is difficult to get the news from poems yet
men suffer miserably every day for lack of what is found there."
And as an organization is committed to fostering the
imagination, poetry, art and specific dreams of our rural youth
we would like to end with what I once heard an elementary
teacher end his lesson with … and that is… "Only in our dreams
can men be truly free. It was always thus… and always thus it
will be.
Thank you.
APPENDIX B
May 2 Presentation
Good evening Ladies and Gentleman. Some of you in this room may
already know me. I’m Greg Fentie, I have a wife and 3 kids north of Springfield on
a dairy farm. I’d like to talk to you tonight about my financial concerns in this
EPAR.
The financial analysis of this EPAR is largely contained on one page in the
ISAR. My first concern is that one page of financial analysis is not an in depth look
at where monies will be saved and spent going forward. There are over 3600
students being affected by this EPAR and we owe them our very best efforts to
get this right. One page in the ISAR is not enough. I was further disappointed to
read the FSAR contained no elaborations. No changes were made to cost
calculations even though several changes were made in the FSAR. Did none of
the costs change or did Financial services just decide not to calculate them?
We have been repeatedly told empty pupil spaces hurt student education.
Solving this is a complex and difficult issue but I’d like to explain how closing
Springfield will not improve the financial situation for TVDSB. On the first line of
page 63 we read that under the proposed changes that facility costs are actually
slated to increase $7,064. This should be highly concerning to all of us as it should
not cost more to operate 9 schools over 12. We of course know this is because
CUPE janitors would be used over contract janitors. This increase is contradictory
to the position that empty pupil spaces hurt students.
Next you will see transportation costs. I’ve taken the liberty of calculating
transportation costs per student for Springfield and other 100% bussing schools in
the EPAR. It’s no wonder the board wants to increase walkers as this saves
money. However; transportation costs are expected to increase $66,916 under
this plan. This is obviously due to the larger distances students are being bussed.
The proposed changes to the Springfield area are the most dramatic. Where
currently 55% of the students are bussed, under the proposed changes 100% will
be bussed. You can see from my chart that when including transportation costs
per student Springfield is very competitive with other rural schools. No projected
costs for bussing are divulged but we must assume that these figures are
APPENDIX B
calculated using the recommended solution in the ISAR. Under the consolidated
change Summers Corners is expected to have approximately the same number of
students with only 9 vehicles to transport them. They currently utilize 18
vehicles. Expecting total bus numbers to halve with the same number of students
is ambitious and only represents the best possible outcome for Senior
Administration and not what may necessarily happen in reality. Actually the scary
reality is that those numbers are for the ISAR and not the updated FSAR. The
FSAR has Summers Corners retaining almost 100 children west of hwy 73.
Furthermore the proposed Belmont School is slated to have only 11 vehicles for
455 kids over an area of 420 square kms. No cost estimate was available for
transportation to Belmont. I ask you to consider is that in the best interest of our
children? Is that even possible or are we seeing the Senior Administration
demonstrate their best hope for cheap bussing when history already tells us the
reality in a rural setting is different. I suggest that increase of $67,000 is not
actually enough to safely transport our children to far away schools. That the
actual cost of bussing students may be much higher.
Now we come to IT costs. The first time we see a savings shown in the
financial analysis. IT has a flat cost of $11,246 per school and 3 fewer schools will
of course save $33,738. It took some figuring that out as Senior Admin does not
like to show their math.
Next line we come to is staffing. We see we are expected to save $87,880.
I can’t dispute this is financially attractive but is only possible due to laying off
principals and secretaries. It’s unfortunate their value to students isn’t
appreciated in this report.
As you can see all of these changes will supposedly save almost $48,000 a
year. A miniscule amount really when you consider the boards actual budget is in
excess of $860 million. It isn’t until we arrive on some line about teacher changes
that we see any real savings under this plan. This will save $365, 659 per year and
I can only assume that is due to larger class sizes and laying off teachers. How
else could you save money in teacher costs? If you study page 6 of 16 in
Springfield’s SIP file you will find our 8 classes average 21 students per room.
APPENDIX B
Approximately 18 per primary class where the cap is 20 and 22 in junior where
the cap is 23. There is very little room to improve teacher costs specific to closing
Springfield as most of our classrooms already run close to capacity.
I have much more I could cover but I’m almost out of time. Chris will
hopefully pick up where I left off. In closing Senior Administration has been
unable to demonstrate the financial need to close Springfield School. Due to our
lower transportation costs, and efficiently managed classrooms it would be very
difficult to argue a cost savings to closing Springfield. In our Mar 8 final report we
offered 2 solutions to improve our utilization rate and cost per student. They
were retain our grade 7’s and 8’s or designate our excess space for collaboration.
If either were undertaken you will find our costs per student drop to board
average. We need to do what is best for our students while controlling spending.
I argue for Springfield’s children there is no more cost effective way to educate
them than at Springfield Public School.
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
1
Greg Fentie
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
2
Cost per Student
Cost per student in the report Transportation cost Total Cost
Springfield $1,848.90 $677.10 $2,526.00
Summers Corners $1,538.09 $905.28 $2,443.37
Sparta $1,483.57 $848.58 $2,332.15
South Dorchester $1,486.72 $874.96 $2,361.68
New Sarum $1,592.30 $1,156.88 $2,749.18
Westminister 4,064.89$ $1,268.20 5,333.09$
It is worth noting that New Sarum has 3 walkers and a significant specialized transportation
budget that skews their costs very high
Calculated by dividing total transportation costs by all students as reported on page 4 of 16 in SIP
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
3
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
4
Staffing
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
5
Proposed Options
Current 7's and 8's Collaboration
Enrollment 167 207 167
OTG capacity 268 245 190
Utilization 62.30%84.50%87.80%
Cost to school $308,768.00 $308,768.00 $308,768.00
Cost per student $1,848.90 $1,491.63 Unknown
APPENDIX B
Good evening, I would like to introduce myself, I am Chris Cox a parent,
PAR Sub Committee Chair for Springfield Public School and Community Services
Coordinator for the Township of Malahide. I am going to be continuing on where
Greg left off on the financial concerns of this EPAR and discuss the growing
community of Springfield.
Being the Community Services Coordinator for the Township I look after all
of the building and facilities that we own, so renewal needs are something I deal
with every year. With this being said it is only when renewal needs are considered
in this EPAR that the financial outlook of this plan begins to become clear. The
removal of $17,784,122 in renewal needs for the initial construction cost of
$31,541,000 leaves a balance of $13,756,878. This is much more palatable figure
it seems to show for costing on the new build. With this you will supposedly see a
return on investment in just over 33 years if we could find an interest free loan.
Let’s examine these renewal needs for Springfield which you can find on page 10
of 16 in our SIP. At first glance our renewal needs seem high. Then you start
looking at them. Most of them made me uneasy about how my tax dollars are
being spent. $202,000 for rain water drainage renewal? We can systematically
tile land for $1000/acre in the Township and Springfield Public School sits on 5.2
acres. This is pretty easy math. If more extensive work is needed for this then I
suppose an excavator might be needed for a couple of days but we aren’t buying
the excavator. Exterior, exit and emergency lighting renewals totaling over
$81,000. All lights are currently working and cause no safety concerns to children,
staff or parents but we need to renew them? I’ve had an individual familiar with
systems used in schools analyze the renewal needs and found in reality the cost
for our renewal needs to be just above one million dollars not $3,796,104 as
Senior Administration would have us believe. I suggest these renewal costs are
artificially high to better justify the closing of schools and therefore build new
schools. I implore you Trustee’s to re-evaluate how school renewal needs are
calculated because overpaying for renewal needs is money that is taken away
from a child’s education.
APPENDIX B
Moving away from some negative about the school I would like to discuss
Springfield and how it is the designated growth area for the Township of
Malahide. Yes we don’t grow the same as centres like St. Thomas, Dorchester or
London but we also don’t want to. Each year we have more and more houses
built in the Springfield Public School catchment area. This past year alone 6
houses have been built out of a small expansion of 7 houses, these 6 houses have
15 kids living at them. Unlike larger urban centres where you may get 1 kid out of
every 2 houses, the larger number of kids per household is the norm for us. This
slow and steady growth will continue to add pupils into those seats at Springfield
Public School each and every year. Already for the 2017 / 2018 school year we
have 21 jk children registered, that is over one full class room of brand new
students.
People wonder about Springfield’s growth and how this can be seen as it is
such a small community. Let’s give you an example of growth in our area, The
Springfield Brewers Softball Association which is the kid’s softball program which
started in 2012 with 24 kids, 1 boy’s team and 1 girls team. This year in season 5 it
has 320+ kids registered to play. Springfield is the hub of activity in the area, just
like Belmont is in the winter for hockey. It is such a growth area that the Brewers
Association along with the communities support is paying for a new ball diamond
to be added so the kids in the community have a better experience and better
facilities to use. Communities all over Ontario are telling the suppliers that are
building this ball diamond that they want what Springfield has. This goes the same
for school communities as well and shown in this report, we have a great school
and a great community and that is what others want.
As the Thames Valley keeps saying “Putting Students First”, Springfield does
put students / children first to provide them what they need to succeed in both
education, health and life. I ask that one of you makes a motion on May 23rd to
remove Springfield Public School from this EPAR and to keep us open. Then from
there look at either bringing the 7 & 8’s back to the school, use the space that was
originally built into the school for Collaboration efforts as that again or just leave
it as it is as it is running just fine. Thanks.
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX B
My name is Johnny Wilson. My son Liam is in grade 2, & my daughter Livi is in
SK. We live 4 miles north of Springfield, on Wilson Line. Much like Springfield
School, we too, have been there longer than Canada has been a country.
The issue before the trustees is whether to listen to the community of Springfield,
or to the bean counters that listen to the algorithms that come out of the Queen’s
Park bubble.
Unfortunately there seems to be a vendetta against rural schools, from the upper
echelon of the MOE to some of the administration of the TVDSB.
There have been MANY times when the integrity of the PAR process has been
called into question.
The 2010 consultation agreement signed between the County of Elgin and the
TVDSB, was wiped out in the 2015 legislative change. County Council was no
longer allowed to ask any questions about school closures, or anything to do with
a PAR. Councilors protested, saying that if you can’t ask questions, then why
bother meeting. The answer….because it is mandated by the province, and
everyone has the opportunity to ask questions during the PAR proceedings. The
end result is that administration is not accountable to questioning from the
elected and accountable County Council.
Our MPP Jeff Yurek, requested a briefing about the PAR, and was refused.
Once again, administration wouldn’t answer questions, this time from our elected
and accountable Member of Provincial Parliament.
Our School PAR committee encountered road blocks and non-answers on many
occasions. Just one example is when we asked for SIP’s for John Wise PS,
Elgin Court PS, and a number of other schools…we were told they don’ t exist.
Of course, all of the information contained in an SIP does exist, and they knew
what we were asking for, but, technically, since we didn’t know how to ask for it,
we got the run around. By the time people figure out the rules of the game, and
how to play, the game is over…BY DESIGN!
Similarly, the first public meeting held at East Elgin was frontloaded with
longwinded content, followed by a limited question period. The chair of that
meeting, blamed the province for the process and for its inadequacies, when in
fact he sat on the committee that came up with the new fast tracked PAR
process.
We have heard many times from administration how municipalities were
“consulted”. This is yet another disingenuous statement. Municipalities weren’t
allowed to ask questions like “Why would you rip the heart out of the number one
designated growth area in the entire municipality?”
APPENDIX B
True consultation would take into account the devastating effect this would have
on the residents of the township’s largest village, their property values, the
businesses, the collapsing tax base, and above all else the effects on this
growing community’s children. Someone has to be held to account.
Going forward, BAD PLANS can be changed. Why do nearly half of the new
schools built in the last 8 years, already require portables? Of the 15 additions
built in the last 3 years, there are 46 portables at these schools. Do you call this
“good planning”? Some schools go underfunded, have their boundaries changed
to lower attendance, have programming & building maintenance cut, all designed
for self-fulfilling prophesies of decline. Meanwhile, schools next door bulge in
order to manipulate statistics. Who is held accountable?
YOU need to dig deeper than the report put before you. They are just the figures
that suit the administration’s plan, NOT all of the facts required for a decision.
The main reason Springfield has been slated to close is to use our students as
pawns to improve the “business case” for a new school in Belmont. This
business case doesn’t consider what is best for our children, but rather to hack
the algorithm and extract maximum funding for a new school. Unelected,
unaccountable bureaucrats can’t be allowed to change the fate of an entire
municipality. The last line of defence that we have, are you, the trustees.
YOU make the decisions, NOT the administration.
Springfield is not a rural community in decline. It is, in fact, growing. We aren’t
expanding like urban sprawl, and thank goodness. We need land to grow your
food. But we are growing, at our own rural pace.
We are different out here. Rural folks measure time in generations. For
example, Greg Fentie and myself have been friends and neighbours for 5
generations, and we are both in the same family business as our great great
grandfathers. Our kids will make it 6 generations of rural tradition. Don’t ruin our
way of life.
Many of us, the rural taxpayers, parents, and students of the TVDSB are farmers.
We grow your food. With respect to the closing of rural schools, it’s a good thing
that we aren’t also responsible for the distribution of that food. Because some
people in this room would receive food by the bushel, and some Bushells would
find their baskets empty.
APPENDIX B
Good evening Trustees and Senior Administration. My name is Jessica
Goodwill and I am a Springfield resident and mother to 5 children. My husband
and I picked up and moved our family, over an hour away, to a little town in the
middle of no where so we could get out of the city to raise our children.
At the time of the move our daughters were aged 5,4,2 and 1 and our little
boy was still in the oven. We had one child about to start grade 1 and one about
to start junior kindergarten. I was some what familiar with the routine and life of
having children in school by this point. Springfield public school is about 700
meters from my house, but that wasn’t a selling feature for us as our daughters
attended French Immersion. Vivian started grade 1 at Pierre Elliot Trudeau in St
Thomas. She was in one of eight grade 1 classes. The bus picked her up at 8:05 am
and dropped her back off at home at 4:30 pm. It was difficult to sign Vivian up for
extra curricular activities as she would have little to no down time after school.
I had no choice but to send Lilah to Springfield P.S. for one year as TVDSB
doesn’t offer French in JK. Right off the bat I didn’t like sending my children to
two different schools, but if I wanted Lilah to attend JK this was the only option,
little did I know the influence Springfield Public School would have on our family.
APPENDIX B
The first few days of school were GREAT as most children’s are! The kids
came home excited about their new routines, new clothes, new friends and new
teachers, but it wasn’t until routine really started to settle in that I noticed my
daughters were having two TOTALLY different experiences. It was almost
alarming. Six weeks into the school year, Lilah, who attended junior kindergarten
at Springfield P.S. still had a pep in her step. She knew almost every teacher’s
name in the school and many of the older student were also waving to her in the
hall ways. I was kind of surprised by this as it was not something I was used to,
but she absolutely loved it and felt like she really belonged. When I walked to pick
her up from school, I saw her teacher every single day and was able to ask how
things were going. The children were kind and close to one another, no matter
what grade they were in. When we got home from school she had an entire
HOUR to unwind and play before Vivian was even off the bus. Sounds great,
doesn’t it?
On the other hand, I had Vivian in grade 1 at Pierre Elliot Trudeau getting
off the bus exhausted, grouchy, sad. She didn’t want to play or talk, she would
often get sent to her room for being sassy and end up falling asleep before dinner.
This was not like her. When I asked Vivian how her day went, I would always get a
different response. Her friends changed daily. She would tell me that “so and so”
APPENDIX B
didn’t want to play with her that day because they had new friends. I would also
hear that at recess she couldn’t find any of her friends because there were too
many kids on the yard, so she would just sit by herself against the brick wall. I had
frequent communications with her teacher via telephone because I had never
actually met her. I had asked her to help Vivian on the school yard because she
was having a hard time finding her groove. This went on for weeks before I had
enough of seeing my daughter break down physically and emotionally and I
started to inquire with the principal at Springfield P.S about making the switch.
Almost over night I pulled Vivian from Pierre Elliot Trudeau and put her into
Springfield P.S. I walked her to class that first day, and 3 girls welcomed her with
open arms, literally. Guess what? They are still best friends today. Guess what?
That sassy exhausted little girl was gone and we never looked back. I never ONCE
regretted my decision to make Springfield Public School our choice even though it
meant I had to give up the opportunity for our children to learn a second
language. If our school closes, we will be going back to the very routine we tried
to get away from. Not every child thrives in a large school setting, mine certainly
didn’t.
As you can imagine, this process has been very difficult for our community.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. You have undoubtedly grown to see and believe we
APPENDIX B
are committed to this process until the end. The school is an essential part of our
community and our community is essential for our students. Parental
involvement is one of the biggest factors in student success and if you vote to
close Springfield PS you will remove the students from their community and lose
the dedication of all of us wearing maroon tonight. I understand that Senior
Administration has promised that these renovations, upgrades and new big
schools will provide better programming for our children. But where is the proof?
Most programs and clubs are approved by administration at the school level and
we need willing teachers to run them. If our parent council can’t get a garden club
or drama club started because of lack of staff support, how on earth can Senior
Administration promise that the staff at these new schools will provide this for my
children. I think we quickly forget how much of our children’s education actually
lies within the teacher, not the building. Our children will not receive a better
education if these consolidations go ahead. Our children should be learning the
same curriculum no matter the size of the school.
So, in conclusion trustees, the consequences of closing our school will have
a devastating impact on our rural area for years to come. When the school is
closed, it will be closed forever. We urge you to please think carefully, to consider
OUR children in this decision and do the right thing. Tell our community that we
APPENDIX B
matter too. Bring our grade 7s and 8s students home and keep Springfield Public
School open!
APPENDIX B
Title: Fwd: Cameron Charlton's TVDSB Presentation for 7:30pm, ...Page 1 of 3
5/4/2017 12:40:2...
Fwd: Cameron Charlton's TVDSB Presentation for 7:30pm, May 3, 2017
From:Bonnie Williams
"Charlton, Cameron"
Subject:
To:Claudia Wiercinski
Hi Bonnie,
Can't remember if I sent this to you ahead of time. Here you go.
Kind regards,
Cameron
From: Cameron Charlton
Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 9:53 PM
To: Charlton, Cameron
Subject:
Studies show that when people are faced with a choice, they are more likely to pick the option that avoids pain, rather
than the one that offers gain. The human brain is simply wired that way.
When most people are trying to move someone to do something, or buy something, or convince someone of something,
they focus on presenting the features and benefits. In other words, the emphasis is on what you have to gain.
Instead, let’s look at the threats, the viability, and safety of the status quo here, which is doing nothing. Not putting a
new school in Belmont Ontario.
With respect to the Pupil Accommodation Review, the area under review is a vast geographical zone that has
undergone a shift in population, resulting in low student enrolment in rural areas. This is why we are here. It is a fact
that infrastructure is aging, and there are utilization imbalances at schools over this entire area.
Im a father of 2 young boys attending SDPS. I drive all over this local area, and I see the save our school signs. I
understand that every parent is fighting like hell to keep their local school open. It’s a normal reaction. As humans, we
love to get comfortable with what we have and what we are used to. It’s not human nature to crave change. But,
c hange is the norm these days. Being comfortable with being uncomfortable is a reality. We have an amazing
APPENDIX B
Title: Fwd: Cameron Charlton's TVDSB Presentation for 7:30pm, ...Page 2 of 3
opportunity to do something great here – build a new school!
So why wouldn’t we want to build a new school? By nurturing and facilitating learning and growth to all students at a
Belmont school on their journey through the grades, it will not only ensure a better academic future for our children, but
it will demonstrate the virtues of the TVDSB to the rest of the province in general. Let’s build something, instead of
doing nothing. The economics are there, and the population shifts are there to support this.
I realize that many of you don’t feel that there isn’t a win-win situation here, and you the trustees can talk yourself into
whatever corner you want to be in. But we all know that doing nothing, leaving things as is, is likely the worst outcome
here. Wisdom is knowing what to do next; skill is knowing how to do it; and virtue is doing it. Change is change,
and the best part about change – is that we all eventually adapt.
Someday, many of these rural schools will close. We all know this. Why can’t that time be now? Why can’t now be
the time that we bring a new school to Belmont?
I was born and raised on a dairy farm in Springfield. I attended Springfield PS from SK to grade 6. I regularly volunteer
to coach my kids baseball league in Springfield, Soccer in Belmont, and swim team in Aylmer. And while Belmont is a
small town, many of the kids on my kids soccer roster are from other surrounding communities in Springfield, Alymer,
Glanworth, Harrietsville, Crampton, Gladstone, and Westminster. Every community has something to offer. Building a
school in Belmont isn’t going to take away from that.
Belmont has waited a long time for this. The town continues to grow and we have immense support from the town and
surrounding area. 94% of the Westminster Central Public School community supports this proposal, 94% of the South
Dorchester Public School’s community supports this proposal, and there are currently 700 signatures on our petition to
show support for the proposed new Belmont School.
Trustees, we’ve been here before. How many times have these schools been threatened with closure? How many
more times are we going to put local families thru this. It’s frustrating, it’s a challenge to deal with, and we know there
are funding disadvantages of being a small school. The status quo, or doing nothing is not going to make for a better
future.
You can be sure that budgets are only going to get tighter, infrastructure is only going to get more tired, and I don’t think
we’re going to see population explosions in our rural areas to justify the economics of the status quo.
We live in a digital world. Can you honestly say that our small schools aren’t falling behind with technology? These
small schools are not outfitted with the means to compete. Leave your emotions behind, so we don’t leave our
children behind.
So, we know what needs to happen next. You’ve done the research. And, You have the capability to do something
positive, and build something new.
We’ve seen that it’s in hardships that we often find strength from family. With a new school in Belmont, we’re bringing
families from all surrounding rural communities together, for a better future.
So, to our trustees, I want to ask you, Why can’t we have a new school in Belmont? Why can’t that day be now? Let’s
play the long game here. As a school trustee, here is your chance to make good students even better.
Thank you
_______________________________________________________________________
If you received this email in error, please advise the sender (by return email or otherwise) immediately. You have
consented to receive the attached electronically at the above-noted email address; please retain a copy of this
APPENDIX B
Title: Fwd: Cameron Charlton's TVDSB Presentation for 7:30pm, ...Page 3 of 3
confirmation for future reference. You may unsubscribe from promotional emails.
Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez en aviser l'expéditeur immédiatement, par retour de courriel ou par un
autre moyen. Vous avez accepté de recevoir le(s) document(s) ci-joint(s) par voie électronique à l'adresse courriel
indiquée ci-dessus; veuillez conserver une copie de cette confirmation pour les fins de reference future. Vous pouvez
vous désinscrire de la liste d’envoi de courriels promotionnels.
APPENDIX B
Speech for School presentation:
Good evening, my name is Noelle Racicot-Kelly and I support a new rural school in
Belmont.
My daughters graduated from South Dorchester Public Elementary School in 2010 and
2013. SDPS is one of the reasons why we chose to move to Belmont. My husband and I
will often tell our girls that we gave them the closest thing to a private education that
we could afford.
I’ve spent considerable time thinking about what I was going to say this evening. The
more time I spent reflecting, the more frustrated I started to feel. One question
emerged.
WHY?
Why are we still debating bringing a new rural school to Belmont?
When South Dorchester stopped meeting the needs of the community twenty years
ago, why was sending our grade 7 and 8’s out of the community to Aylmer the best we
could do? Why did we think it was good planning to send our kids for seven years to a
school where they don’t just leave for school, they leave to go to their "other" family,
and then we rip them out and send them to a holding space for two years before High
School? I can’t imagine the challenges for the teachers at Davenport to try to build
relationships with the parents and the children in that short time of two years, to
prepare them for secondary transition. I can tell you how hard it was as a parent, how
many times I told my girls it’s only temporary, it will be over soon and you will move on
to a school where you can settle in. I can tell you when you are only a part of a school
community for a very short time, and everybody knows this is a short term relationship
at the start, that the experience for the students, the parents, and the teachers, is not
what it could be. This decision might have made sense from a dollars perspective, but
did we ever ask ourselves what the impact was on these children – what it was like to be
moved from going to their other family every day – right when they are starting their
adolescence, which is a time of great change and growth – and dropping them
elsewhere for two years before introducing another significant change as they left for
secondary school?
APPENDIX B
One outstanding thing about South Dorchester Elementary was the way that children
with special needs were treated. I watched how beautifully the school supported
inclusion for two children in my youngest daughter's class all through her time at SDPS.
When I was at that school volunteering, I would marvel at the significant relationships
that these children had with the other students. The kids were taught to take care of
each other. You could see these two children seek and receive help and support from
the others. Valuable lessons were learned by all the children, lessons about caring,
leadership, and social responsibility. The day I attended with my youngest daughter to
tour Davenport, I watched as these two exceptional children were led away from the
group to tour the special education classes. They did not understand why they were
being taken away from their friends.
I wonder what it was like for those children to be separated in this manner? I wonder
how it felt for them at 11 years old, to be removed from their safety net into the
unfamiliar, only for it to change again two years later. Why did those children have to
wait until GRADE 7 for better supports in a formalized program and why did they have
to give up their sense of security and school to get it?
Shame on us, and shame on this board for neglecting the most vulnerable of our
children by allowing this situation to continue for so long. Shame on anyone who would
oppose changing this.
Why has it been acceptable to send our children out of our community to attend grades
JK to 6 in a building that has no air conditioning, windows that don’t open, issues with a
leaking roof, with mold, that is too small, that doesn’t even have proper supply of
drinking water? In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly recognized that access to
water and sanitation should be a human right. A HUMAN RIGHT. We are sending our
children daily to a building where they don't have access to proper drinking water. Why
is this acceptable?
Why when South Dorchester was under review in 2008 did the board continue using the
underutilized and crumbling schools of Westminster and South Dorchester for another 8
years?
Why in 2008 was our community denied when we asked the board to change the
boundaries so that students could perhaps attend Westminster or New Sarum? Why
APPENDIX B
was the future planning and growth that was going to occur in Belmont not considered
when a new rural school for Belmont was struck down? Here we are, 8 years later, lots
of new homes in Belmont and more to come…still waiting for our rural school. Why
have our kids waited 20 years - a whole generation - while this board and the trustees
keep getting it wrong? Are our children less deserving?
Why are we STILL begging the board for this school when it should have been built years
ago?
Why on earth would this board and this committee wait any longer to do the right
thing? Why would you let any argument, plan, or opposition stall or end the hopes of a
new rural school in Belmont?
Our community doesn’t want to talk anymore about WHY. We don't want to talk
anymore about IF. You have an opportunity now, to make this right.
Let’s change our vocabulary. Our community is asking you tonight the question WHEN.
And the answer from the trustees, the board, the ministry, and the province needs to be
NOW.
Thank you
APPENDIX B
Hello my name is Ila Manderson and I’m a former student at Westminster
Central, I have a sister named Eliza in grade 6, a brother named David in grade 3, and
lastly a brother named Nolan who will be going to Westminster next fall and will benefit
the most from a new school in Belmont. I’ve gone to WCPS for the first 11 years of my
education and there were many struggles and if possible I would like to make it so my
siblings don’t need to go through what I went through, and other kids as well.
Small schools do come with a few advantages but they also come with many
disadvantages and until you go to a bigger school you really don’t know how much you
are missing out on. Unfortunately for me I didn’t get to see that till high school. Talking
to other grade 9’s that went to different bigger elementary school’s I discovered that
they had so many other sports teams and clubs that I never got take part in at
Westminster. Weather it was lack of interest or simply because there wasn’t enough
kids to even form a team. This was hard, and made school a place where all you did
was sit at a desk and learn nothing more. The clubs offered were the bare minimum and
the sports where cross country and track and field both being individual sports and we
had an amazing volleyball team but it was only offered because you only needed 6
people to play. Since WCPS didn’t offer that many extracurriculars my family did many
activities in Belmont, from piano lessons to soccer and using the park and splash pad.
Meaning Belmont is our community as it is for many families. Belmont is a rural town so
building a school there would still hold the agricultural values that many families at
Westminster have.
APPENDIX B
So now let's talk about me, in my early years there were many more students at
the school then now. We had more events that took place like talent shows, a big winter
carnival, plays and book fairs ; but now not much goes on. When I started there was 2
classes for each grade but when grade 3 came around all the Lambeth and Delaware
kids left to new schools and our school became the size that it is today. From that point
on we had all split grades.
Once our number decreased things really started to change, our playground
disappeared and never was replaced making recess time filled with limited toy such as
skipping ropes and hula hoops. I bet I can come up with more games using a single
skipping rope then you! (sarcastically) Inside the school, when things would break or
become worn out they never got replaced like computer headphone and gym
equipment. Thankfully our parent council has stepped forward this year and replaced
what they could.
I graduated from Westminster last year with a class of 6!! Yes, you heard that
right folks 6…. 3 boys, and 3 girls and to me that sounds pretty ridiculous. The social
aspects of school life was very difficult at times with limited fellow students. In a bigger
school you would have more choices of friends but when there is only 2 girls to pick
from we either all got along or there was someone left out. There were many moments
when school was socially awkward because of this.
APPENDIX B
Going to highschool was pretty overwhelming, when you go from a school of 88
kids to a school with 500 the difference in size shows. For me going to highschool was a
very positive experience because my parents made it that way. I was excited to go
because it would mean I could start fresh with a new blank chapter. But if my parents
weren’t there with all the support and positivity I don’t think I would be where I am today
in high school. I’m not say that all the students moving to Belmont will have an easy
transition, but with a positive attitude it could make a Belmont school an amazing
opportunity for everyone.
I made the best out of my years at WCPS, making myself a leader and involved
in everything the school had to offer but I could have had so many more opportunities
had I gone to a bigger school with more funding and more student. Yes, it was nice to
know every student, teacher, and parent in the school. Making it almost seem like one
big family but that is not enough to keep that school thriving, I would love to see a new
school happen for Belmont because now I can personal tell you that a bigger school has
more pros than cons.
Thank you for your time and attention letting me share with you my story.
APPENDIX B
1
Good evening,
My name is Sarah Fletcher. My children Claira and Max attend Westminster Central Public
School. On behalf of the Westminster Central Parent Council I would like to take a moment to
thank our Trustees and Senior Administration for the opportunity to share the overwhelming
support our school community has for the proposed new Belmont School. I am here this evening
proudly representing the families of our community; A community who is very grateful for the
dedicated and hardworking staff at our school; a community who views the proposed new
Belmont school as an opportunity to provide our children with an enhanced education in their
rural community; an opportunity that will foster positive growth and change; and an opportunity
for a sustainable rural education.
Unfortunately, our school has the highest cost-per-student across the entire Board. Yet after
operating, staffing and maintenance costs, it is still a challenge to provide the funding necessary
to support the full range of learning opportunities available to students at other schools. Nor
should the Board be expected to continue to subsidize this less-than-desirable arrangement when
there is a long-term solution available through this important decision brought before you. This
solution, if supported, willingly closes our school – an underutilized school in poor physical
condition that opened fifty years ago to serve a geographical boundary that can no longer
effectively or efficiently sustain itself.
As you know, Westminster Central has been under scrutiny for many years due to its low
enrolment. In 2013, Karen Dalton, Executive Superintendent, came to our school to discuss
alternative options for our children. At that time, 88% of families supported the status quo. In
2014-15, we were included in the SE London Attendance Area Review. At that time, 93% of our
families supported the alternative option our school community presented, which was relocating
our children to a new school in Belmont. Our most recent survey results from the EPAR-01
indicate that 94% of our families support the proposed new Belmont school.
In the past five years, our school has been threatened with closure three times. This has caused
great uncertainty and frustration for many of our families. Tonight; however, we are hopeful.
Hopeful that our Trustees will support the recommendation for the proposed new Belmont
School. This recommendation provides a viable and permanent solution for our children, future
children and our School Board. More importantly, endorsing this recommendation provides our
children the opportunity to attend a school in their rural community while expanding their
learning opportunities and experiences in positive and meaningful ways.
The support for the Belmont School extends beyond our school community. Jeff Yurek, The
Municipality of Central Elgin, Fiona Roberts, Ward 5 Councillor for Central Elgin, the Belmont
Library, the Belmont Minor Hockey Association, the Belmont Minor Soccer Association and
94% of the South Dorchester community supports this proposal. Additionally, there are 700
signatures are on our petition showing support.
The proposed new Belmont school benefits our school community as well as our School Board
in the following ways:
APPENDIX B
2
1) Most importantly, it puts the needs of our children first. This solution keeps rural
students in a rural school.
2) Parent involvement plays a significant role in the social well-being and academic success
of our children. We know that parent involvement will remain high and in fact may
increase with a school in Belmont as we already self-identify Belmont as our community.
3) We know that the Ministry is building schools in areas of growth. Belmont has been
deemed a growth area by the municipality of Central Elgin. It is a thriving and vibrant
community that has access to municipal water and sanitation services.
4) The Facility Condition Index of Westminster Central and South Dorchester are
significantly higher than the Board’s average. Our school’s renewal needs are significant
and backlogged. The proposed new Belmont school offers our children the opportunity
to attend a new, modern and updated facility. Moreover, this solution permanently
eliminates approximately 10.5 million dollars in combined five-year renewal needs for
these two schools alone.
5) A new school in Belmont would provide the greater Belmont community with a new
facility for community programs and events; something community members of all ages
can benefit from. We know that community rental use generates revenue for the school
which can provide further benefits to our children.
6) A new school in Belmont would allow our Parent Council to expand our fundraising
efforts beyond school necessities to items and experiences that will enhance our
children’s learning. We are currently experiencing firsthand the funding challenges of a
small school. Our Parent Council has recently purchased: a replacement carpet for our
grade ½ classroom, replacement headsets for our learning commons, 10 Ipads,
replacement physical education equipment, toys for our FDK classroom, fans for each
classroom, robotics, and most recently, we’ve been asked to purchase vertical, non-
permanent three-part math surfaces to support our school’s renewed math strategy. We
would like to fundraise for permanent outdoor playground equipment, an outdoor
learning environment and school trips, but unfortunately greater needs exist in our small
school.
As part of this Pupil Accommodation Review, our PAR committee requested a tour of a new
school similar in size to the proposed new Belmont school. We had the opportunity to tour John
Wise. The following differences were noted when comparing John Wise to Westminster
Central: larger, brighter classrooms, a larger and more diverse number of extra curricular
activities, greater access to current technology, an improved gymnasium, an activity room, air
conditioning, enhanced security system and cameras and an extensive and improved learning
commons. As part of our tour, we learned that John Wise recently received $20,000 in upgrades
to their learning commons. This project was funded by their school’s portion of its community
use rental profits. Last year our parent council was asked to donate $750 so that one of our
teachers, who’s position includes 0.14 FTE library complement, could attend the Spring-Take
Away Book Sale to purchase new resources for our learning commons. This sale required a
APPENDIX B
3
minimum purchase of $1000. Only $250 of the $1000 could come from our school’s budget.
This comparison demonstrates the funding discrepancies between small and large schools, and
the inadequate funding small schools receive.
7) A larger student population will offer our children increased extracurricular and social
opportunities. Westminster Central lacks sufficient numbers to offer certain extra-
curricular sports and peer socialization is limited due to our low enrolment. As Ila
previously mentioned tonight, creating authentic and meaningful friendships can be
difficult in such a small school.
8) Rather than the Westminster Central and South Dorchester Public School children being
bussed out of their community, they will be bussed into their community. The same
community where they already play soccer, hockey, take music lessons, go to church,
attend parks, the splash pad, parades, and other community activities. A community
where strong ties already exist. This includes South Dorchester children who would no
longer have to be bussed out of their community to Davenport Public School in Aylmer
for their grade 7 and 8 school years. Depending on the location of the proposed new
school, there is an increased likelihood for students living in Belmont to walk to school.
9) This proposed consolidation addresses the underutilization issue at Westminster and the
overcapacity issue at South Dorchester. It acknowledges the population shift in our
geographical area and provides our children with the opportunity to learn in an improved
facility in their rural community. It creates a school with a larger student population and
therefore the can provide the funding necessary to support their learning.
There is no doubt that the closure of Westminster Central will be bittersweet, but we know it is
simply the physical building we will be saying goodbye to. We believe everything great that
takes place at Westminster Central will continue to take place in Belmont, because this greatness
lives in the children who learn and grow here, and our community that supports and fosters their
growth. Relocating our children to a new school in their rural community is as a positive change
and an opportunity for a sustainable rural education. We want to provide our children with the
best possible learning environment so that they can reach their greatest potential. We believe
that the proposed new Belmont school will accomplish this.
The TVDSB’s mission is to build each student’s tomorrow, every day. Please support building
our children’s future in Belmont.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
Kind regards,
Sarah Fletcher
APPENDIX B
Good evening,
Thanks to everyone for the commitment to getting this right. It’s important that we do.
Trustees, obviously, you have a few things to think about for the next couple weeks. I want to encourage
you to consider how you can make this first run of the EPAR process a success. The planning department
recommendations present an opportunity to point our region in a progressive responsible direction. No
matter what you choose, some will be pleased, and some angry. What matters is that you choose to
support a plan benefitting the entire region, our students and the taxpayers for decades to come; long
after the children currently attending these schools today have graduated.
I was raised on a farm near Straffordville, live in Belmont, pay taxes in Central Elgin and have two young
kids; in these ways, my vantage point of this situation is like most others you have heard.
Where my perspective might differ is that I have no specific interest in a school opening in Belmont, nor
do I have any specific interest in the closure of any other school; I came here because the EPAR process
has all the underpinnings to be an agile, comprehensive and fair process of ongoing needs assessment.
That sort of efficient process is desperately lacking in public institutions and I hope to see this be a
success. It’s okay to want great education AND efficiency, no one I know thinks their property taxes are
too low.
I have 4 general expectation of our trustees:
1. that you will provide our children with quality programs, comfortable facilities conducive to
learning and the same dedicated educators we already know
2. that you will deliver these things efficiently as expected by all taxpayers through responsible
management of infrastructure, this will always mean schools are opened and closed when and
where it makes sense to do so
3. that timely decisions will be made to address issues in our region
4. That your decisions will account for total overall value. I have heard repeatedly during this
process what a mistake it is to try to evaluate the entire region in a single proposal and I could
not disagree more. A big picture review of our region is the only way you can intelligently
evaluate potential courses of action. The EPAR 01 recommendations boldly attempted to
address many issues of aging infrastructure and utilization imbalances at schools all the way
from Westminster to Pt. Stanley. The recommendations offer a suggested solution that keeps
our rural students in rural schools and provides good overall value.
Is the proposal perfect? Perfect solutions don’t exist; but the best solutions can be delivered by leaders
who will look at the big picture and plan for the future.
The disagreements we have as residents are numerous, many of them are distractions from the
objective that most of us share. We want strong rural schools. Strong rural schools made of caring
people from the community who support programs that deliver character building educational
experiences in comfortable up to date facilities. We can’t pretend nothing has changed since our
existing schools were built 50 years ago. I suspect everyone in this room believes our kids should have
access to technology, access to special education programs and specialized support; in short, access to
the programs and facilities that are available in 2017, few of which were available in 1960. It is
unreasonable to expect the equipment, staff, workshop spaces and infrastructure for modern programs
be spread, unnecessarily, across multiple schools without being cost prohibitive.
Michael Taylor
APPENDIX B
If this process comes down to an all or nothing vote on the proposal as it stands tonight; I believe doing
nothing is the worst thing that can happen for our region. We have seen nothing happening for a long
time and our region is not getting our share of the province’s investment in infrastructure. At a
minimum acting on this recommendation gives the region 2 years to review boundaries, refine plans and
adjust our course if adjustments are needed. Doing nothing gets us nothing, with no guarantee of when
we will be looked at again. Many have urged you to delay until the funding formula review happens; if
that review ever finishes, what guarantee is there that funding won’t decrease in our region in favor of
shifting more money to Northern Ontario?
BUT, I also believe that both accepting this proposal as it stands AND a choice to do nothing will be
judged as a failure of this process, and as a failure to demonstrate two important traits of strong
leadership: flexibility and creativity.
Here is what I think a flexible and creative course of action that make’s the EPAR process a success could
look like:
1) Act on what you have learned. Close Westiminster and South Dorchester and build the school in
Belmont, as specified for 500 students with the understanding that within 1 year you will have
finalized the catchment area. Taxpayers deserve the efficiency of these larger schools.
2) Listen to what the people from New Sarum and St. Thomas have told you. If Doug Tarry is
correct, sufficient residency will be demonstrable to sustain a school in New Sarum and the new
proposed school too soon to ignore. EPAR 03 seems to be warranted to review New Sarum and
an expanded region to the West.
3) Assess Springfield’s proposed catchment area with an expanded review of the region to the
East.
4) Give the Sparta and Pt. Stanley situation the consideration it deserves.
I believe in looking at the big picture, if you also accept that you’re unlikely to design the best solution
on your first attempt. A good process allows you to act on what you have learned and efficiently repeat
where necessary until you have learned enough to get it right.
Take action, demonstrate flexibility and creativity within your constraints and make this process a
success. Don’t wait for perfect formulas that will never exist.
To make this process work, I also believe you need to improve on the approach to public input. This has
been a good starting point, I have learned valuable things during this process from the other
communities; however, more guidance and facilitation offered within, and between the communities
could drastically change the face of these discussions.
Rather than the perception that has developed that communities are pitted against one another, steps
could be taken to foster our understating of shared priorities. To Challenge us as residents to widen our
view of what it means to be a community. Why do we define a community by walking distance, or by
village borders. My family goes to Port Stanley for the beach, Sparta for the shops, Springfield for
baseball and the community center, New Sarum for the diner, and everyone is welcome in Belmont for
Paul the Greek’s buffet, but nobody visits for the schools. It’s unfair to put the full weight of defining
community and building commerce on schools already responsible for educating our children. It is up to
us to shape our communities. Nixon, Eden, Springford, Brownsville and Belmont are all Ontario villages
that once had public schools, when the school left the communities continued to grow.
Michael Taylor
APPENDIX B
There will be no passionate demonstrations to demand you do what makes sense, the elements of this
recommendation that make sense don’t make particularly interesting news articles and there is no
political value in pointing out what the opposition party has done that makes sense, for these reasons it
falls to you alone to do what makes sense. It makes sense to level utilization levels; to use tax money
efficiently; to cost-effectively address infrastructure issues and to build the best overall solution for our
kids.
If you decide this recommendation cannot become the best long term direction for our region, we trust
you will also accept the responsibility of ensuring that solutions are presented in a timely manner that
address all the issues addressed in this recommendation in a more effective, more efficient manner
without derailing the process.
Thank you.
-------------------------------------
1) When and if the upcoming funding formula review is completed, why does everyone assume
it will be any easier to get money?
2) Forecasting home development right now based on Toronto housing is a dangerous game,
central mortgage company
3) fear of kids being lost in the crowd in a 500 person school is understandable as well; thinking
back to Straffordville PS; the way Kindergarten classes and schedules were built we were in
a world of our own, the school within a school concept works; as young children we were
hardly aware there were older kids there at all. And as we grew our boundaries within the
school grew; with the same teacher to pupil ratios the kids have the same opportunity to
develop bonds with their teachers.
4) Improved facilitation may also help focus discussion along the way so that by the time we
reach this final input session we are having a focused discussion rather than a public
argument.
Eg: Busing as an example of what could have been dealt with during early
discussions. As schools open and close or boundary lines are adjusted, some kids will be
closer to schools, some will be further away, the costs and savings will offset. If people
really are concerned with carbon footprint, that’s a large and worthy topic on its own.
20,000 buses get our kids to school day in Ontario. Maybe we can contract companies
that will convert to 0 emissions vehicles, but this topic could have been shifted to a
forum of its own much earlier in the process to guide us toward principled/amicable
decisions by this point.
Michael Taylor
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
1
Michael Taylor
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
2
Michael Taylor
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
3
Michael Taylor
APPENDIX B
2017‐04‐27
4
Michael Taylor
APPENDIX B
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 1 of 10
Date of
Meeting:
Posted Online: March 27
2017 April 11
2017 May 23
Item #:
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐ Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☐ Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF REPORT:
FINAL SENIOR ADMINISTRATION REPORT – ELEMENTARY PUPIL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW 02
PRESENTED BY:
Kevin Bushell, Executive Officer, Facility Services and Capital Planning
PRESENTED FOR: ☒ Approval ☐ Information ☐ Advice
Recommendation(s): 1. THAT Fairmont Public School, at 1040 Hamilton Road, London ON, close, effective 2019
June 30, and declared surplus, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital
funding for the new Southeast London Public School and the addition and renovations at
Tweedsmuir Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
2. THAT the Tweedsmuir Public School junior kindergarten to grade 8 new attendance area
be approved, as per Figure 01, effective 2019 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast London Public School and the
addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
3. THAT the students residing in the proposed Tweedsmuir Public School attendance area
be accommodated at Tweedsmuir Public School, effective 2019 July 01, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast London Public
School and the addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
4. THAT an addition, renovations and program enhancements be constructed at Tweedsmuir
Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
5. THAT a Design Committee be established to provide input regarding the design of an
addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir Public School, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
6. THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to renaming Tweedsmuir
Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
7. THAT the Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review-02 (EPAR-02) Committee be
disbanded.
APPROVED 2017 APRIL 11
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 2 of 10
Purpose: The purpose of this Final Senior Administration Report (FSAR) is to provide the Board with a
summary of EPAR-02 information on the community consultation process and Senior
Administration’s final recommendations for student accommodation for EPAR-02.
Content: BACKGROUND
The Pupil Accommodation Review process can result in many debates regarding how best to
educate students in school communities faced with declining student numbers and outdated
facilities. To make the process of accommodation even more challenging, declining enrolment
within the TVDSB is not evenly distributed. Some suburban communities have had significant
shifts in their population of school age children resulting in both over-capacity schools and under-
capacity schools. Despite these challenges, an important part of educating students is appropriate
accommodation. The TVDSB must respond to and reflect on the distribution of students by using
accommodation reviews to ensure schools operate in the areas where they are most needed.
The school consolidation debate is not a new one. It has long been a difficult process for school
boards. Schools within busy urban core areas in the 1800s and early 1900s were later replaced by
larger schools in the suburbs and now the realities of globalization, declining birth rates and the
industrialization of agriculture have resulted in changing work patterns and additional shifts in
residential locations. In order to manage enrolment changes resulting from shifting demographic
patterns in both urban and rural settings, the Ontario Ministry of Education released a new set of
guidelines for the consolidation of schools in March 2015.
The Ministry’s Guide to Pupil Accommodation Reviews states that, “school boards generally
consolidate and close schools to enable improved educational options and opportunities for
students” (Ontario Ministry of Education, p.4, 2016). Some of these improvements include: a
range of programs and courses, the availability of specialized support services, access to
specialized facilities, sufficient number of students to support sports teams, diverse extracurricular
activities, better school buildings and also improved accessibility features (Ontario Ministry of
Education, 2016).
The benefits for both current and future students are often challenged by adult concerns, regarding
the impact of consolidation on communities, which can also lead to political tensions. However,
school boards have an accountability to ensure that students, now and in the future, experience
their education within positive learning environments. The TVDSB must respond and react to
population shifts and changes in order to offer quality educational experiences to students that
prepare them for global citizenship and the needs of the 21st Century. In order to ensure effective
accommodation planning the board must plan for the future. While the consolidation process may
present concerns for current stakeholders, long range planning for the needs of all students must
continue to be a priority for the TVDSB. Schools are often viewed as a focal point of the
community – a place where generations of adults maintain a sentimental connection to their
formative years as students. Despite fears that communities will be lost through consolidation,
vibrant new communities were created as one-room school houses which grew into larger and
larger facilities. History suggests that the best school communities are created when
administrators, teachers, parents, family and community members join together with the common
purpose of providing the highest quality learning experience for children – regardless of the size or
location of the school building.
As the Ministry’s Guide to Pupil Accommodation Reviews states, “school boards are mainly funded
on a per-student basis through grants from the Ministry of Education, boards, and therefore
schools, lose funding as their enrolment declines” (Ontario Ministry of Education, p.4, 2016). As
this funding decreases, the costs of maintaining empty pupil places increases. The TVDSB must
respond to the reality of this funding model if we are to continue to operate schools in a sustainable
manner. Small schools are more expensive to operate than larger schools. However, school size
does not affect the Board’s continuing priority to offer the best educational experiences to all
students. The focus then must be in the best interests of all students, their learning needs and
aspirations, and their future in a world that is changing. Failure to proactively respond to the
challenges of declining opportunities, which result from declining enrolment, limits student choices.
Therefore, Senior Administration created the recommendations for EPAR-02, to provide the
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 3 of 10
TVDSB with a strategy that will allow the TVDSB to move forward in a more viable manner, thus
providing all students greater opportunities.
PARAMETERS OF EPAR-02
The lens through which Senior Administration reviewed the accommodation of students in EPAR-
02 and structured the final recommendations was filtered by the following questions, as noted in
the Initial Senior Administration Report (ISAR):
Have any issues been identified as a priority of the Board?
The existing population and ongoing residential development in the Southeast corner of London
has warranted the need for a new elementary school in the Summerside community. For many
years the Summerside Holding Zone students have been artificially inflating the utilization at
Fairmont PS and Tweedsmuir PS. On April 14, 2015, the Board approved the permanent
accommodation of Summerside Holding Zones within the new attendance area for the proposed
Southeast London PS, upon opening. Once the funding for permanent accommodation is
approved by the Ministry of Education for the new Southeast London PS, the Board will need a
solution for the resulting empty pupil places at Tweedsmuir PS and Fairmont PS remaining
students or this will leave Tweedsmuir PS at 61% utilization and Fairmont PS at 45% utilization.
Is the current situation sustainable (with respect to enrolment projections, school
utilization, and facility renewal/condition)?
In 2015, including the Holding Zone students, these schools had a total enrolment of 665 and
average utilization of 81%. Excluding Holding Zone students, the existing Fairmont PS and
Tweedsmuir PS attendance areas’ total enrolment was 479 and the averaged utilization would
have been 55%. The proposed recommendations would result in 439 students at Tweedsmuir PS,
with a utilization of 91% upon implementation.
Through the proposed consolidation, closure and disposition of Fairmont PS, the Board will have
removed $4,012,350 of high and urgent renewal needs identified at Fairmont PS.
Does the current situation provide equity of programming for all of our students?
Currently EPAR-02 students experience equity of programming as a result of accommodating the
Holding Zone students. Once these students are accommodated in the new Southeast London PS
there will be a profound impact on the remaining Fairmont/Tweedsmuir PS students.
The resources available to the remaining students will be reduced since the remaining two student
populations will not be able to generate the same level of support if they remain in the current
configuration. This reduction in enrolment and lack of funding would then create a dilution of
resources to the system as a whole. Combining the existing communities’ populations would
maintain funding and resources at existing levels.
Currently, the schools are not fully accessible to students and the public. Upon implementation,
Tweedsmuir PS will become barrier-free and ensure accessibility for everyone.
Is there an opportunity to improve student learning?
Through proposed program enhancements, such as new a gymnasium and activity room,
renovations for a Library Learning Commons, General Arts and kindergarten classrooms, the
Board will be able to maintain and improve the educational experience for Fairmont/Tweedsmuir
PS students.
Is the current situation financially sustainable (with respect to funding available)?
Once Holding Students no longer inflate the current populations of Fairmont PS and Tweedsmuir
PS, the operational costs to maintain, clean and heat these empty spaces will not be funded by the
province. This funding shortfall will have to be subsidized by the system as a whole, further
resulting in classrooms being under allocated in funds and resources diluted.
As indicated in the recommended solution section of the ISAR (Appendix A, page 16 of 20) the
average cost per student will be $1,253.94, a reduction of $803.96, for the proposed
recommended solution using the identified site based costs of School Administration, Facility
Services and Information Technology.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 4 of 10
Are there any potential facility collaboration opportunities with community organizations?
In keeping with the Board’s Community Planning and Facility Organization Procedure (4015b), the
Board would circulate a co-build collaboration opportunity to listed Community Organizations.
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS ENGAGEMENT / CONSULTATION WITH
SCHOOL COMMUNITIES
On 2016 April 12, the Planning Department presented the Draft Elementary Accommodation Study
to the Board of Trustees, a high-level report of observations on accommodation issues in the
TVDSB that are being monitored closely. Identified in the Study was London 01, consisting of
Fairmont PS and Tweedsmuir PS as well as the two Summerside Holding Zones designated to
those schools.
Further, on 2016 November 22, after receiving and carefully considering the Initial Senior
Administration Report - Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review 02 (EPAR-02), the Board
approved the initiation of a Pupil Accommodation Review (PAR) involving Fairmont PS and
Tweedsmuir PS.
Key to the Pupil Accommodation Review (PAR) process is the consultation with community
organizations and municipalities, school communities, and the general public.
Community Organizations and Municipalities
The TVDSB reaches out to community organizations and municipalities to ensure the direction of
the TVDSB’s long term planning corresponds with the municipalities future planning and
development. Communication with community organizations allows for analysis and
synchronization of needs through the potential of utilizing schools with available space or co-build
opportunities. Preliminary consultation with community organizations and municipalities began on
2016, June 15, at the Community Planning & Facility Collaboration annual meeting.
In September 2016, the Board approved staff to contact community organizations regarding the
possible formation of a Pupil Accommodation Review to request any technical planning information
and any possible collaboration opportunities with schools to be studied. A Post-Determination
Meeting was held on 2016, December 14 to explain Senior Administration’s recommendations and
share details on opportunities for input.
Community organizations were also given the opportunity to submit written comments regarding
EPAR-02 for Trustee consideration. No submissions were received for EPAR-02.
Long term planning and analysis of existing needs for school boards, municipalities and community
organizations allows for collaborative accommodation planning and strong communities.
School Communities and the Public
Following the Board’s decision to initiate a Pupil Accommodation Review, a webpage for EPAR-02
was created on the Board website with important and up to date PAR information for the general
public. The website contains the process, important dates, agendas and meeting minutes,
presentations and reports, as well as any other related documents. Social media was also utilized
by the Board to share information and communicate with the public concerning EPAR-02 through
the TVDSB Engage webpage, Facebook, Twitter and through newspaper advertisements.
School Principals also kept their school communities informed through school webpages,
newsletters, school council meetings, and by encouraging parents to contact them or the Board
with any questions or concerns regarding the Pupil Accommodation Review.
EPAR-02 School Subcommittees
At the Initial and Second Public Meetings, information was presented to the School Subcommittees
with an opportunity for Subcommittees to ask questions directly for clarification. The agenda,
minutes and presentation of the Initial, Second and Final Public Meetings can be found in
Appendix F, Appendix G, and Appendix H. A minimum of two School-level Meetings were held for
each School Subcommittee to share information and gather feedback from their school community.
The Planning Department received 3 questions of clarification from the Subcommittees and the
public. The questions and their answers were emailed directly to all of the PAR members and were
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 5 of 10
also posted on the TVDSB’s Planning website for public access. These questions and answers
can be found in Appendix I, Appendix K, and Appendix M.
REPORTS OF THE SCHOOL SUBCOMMITTEE(S)
The Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review-02 (EPAR-02) Committee, comprised of Fairmont
PS and Tweedsmuir PS Subcommittees, completed its task to provide feedback on the Initial
Senior Administration Report (2016 November 22) on behalf of their school communities in
accordance with the TVDSB procedure. At the Final Public Meeting, held 2017, March 09, the
Schools Subcommittees presented their reports. These reports are attached as Appendix J and
Appendix L.
Appreciation is extended to the Pupil Accommodation Review Committee members for the work
completed, the time spent, and the careful deliberations of the members. The work of PAR School
Subcommittee members and input received from community organizations and municipalities
contributes to many voices helping to ensure that a range of possibilities are considered in order to
maximize program opportunities for the maximum number of students.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION REVIEW OF PAR SCHOOL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS,
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION AND PUBLIC INPUT
As part of the revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines, the TVDSB is required to consider
the feedback received from the School Subcommittees. All input has been reviewed and taken
under advisement.
RECOMMENDED SOLUTION
Boards must address the impact and costs of declining enrolment, excess space in schools and
aging facilities. Senior Administration believes it is in the best interest of students to maintain
school populations that support a range of opportunities in programming, extracurricular activities
and services. The recommendations will benefit students with enhanced programming
opportunities, harmonize the projected enrolment with capacity, maximize resources and improve
school utilization.
Fairmont PS is located on a busy arterial road. This increases safety concerns for student
walkers. Tweedsmuir PS is located within an established residential community with existing
sidewalks and walkways that would provide safer walking routes to the school. Given that these
schools are located less than 2 km from each other, and the projected enrolment for the existing
community, students could be accommodated at Tweedsmuir PS.
Senior Administration has recommended: the creation of one JK-8 attendance area by
amalgamating Fairmont PS and Tweedsmuir PS attendance areas that Fairmont PS students be
consolidated at Tweedsmuir PS; Tweedsmuir PS receive an addition and renovations for
accommodation and programming; and the closure and disposition of Fairmont PS.
These recommendations are proposed concurrent with the Summerside Holding Zones (holding at
Fairmont PS and Tweedsmuir PS) being permanently accommodated at the new Southeast
London PS upon opening, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the
new school.
ENROLMENT & CAPACITY
The following graph indicates historical and proposed enrolment of students and the capacity for
this review area. The 2015 utilization not including Holding Zone students of 55% will be corrected
to 91% utilization in 2019 with Senior Administration’s recommendations.
ATTEND
FIGURE
upon Min
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Students (FTE)OTG
Hist
Hist
We buil
ANCE AREA
01 - Propose
nistry of Educa
54%5
81%8
E
G Capacity
torical Enrolme
torical Enrolme
ld each stud
Pa
A
ed new Tweed
ation approva
8%55%
7%82%
EPAR-02 -
ent Holding Co
ent Existing Com
dent’s tomor
age 6 of 10
dsmuir PS att
al of capital fu
%53%
%78%
Schoo
Proposed
ommunity
mmunity
rrow, every
tendance area
unding.
91%
ol Year
Enrolmen
Projected
Projected
day
a, effective 20
88%82
nt and Cap
Enrolment Hold
Enrolment Exis
019 July 01, c
%85%
acity
ding Communi
sting Communi
contingent
ty
ity
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 7 of 10
PROPOSED FACILITY ENHANCEMENTS
Senior Administration is recommending an addition and renovations be constructed for student
accommodation and program enhancements to meet TVDSB standards at Tweedsmuir PS. As
indicated in the ISAR (Appendix A, page 13 of 20), a new gymnasium and primary activity room,
and renovated Library Learning Commons, General Arts room, relocating the Early Years division
on the main floor, as well as barrier free enhancements are proposed.
As part of the redesign process for Tweedsmuir PS, access to the school, the parking, drop off
area and bus drops will be examined. The safety and efficiency will be evaluated and brought up
to meet Board standards.
SPECIALIZED PROGRAMS
Final placement of the self-contained Deaf and Hard of Hearing program class is outside the
purview of this process. The placements of self-contained Special Education program classes are
at the discretion of the Special Education Department.
EARLY ATTENDANCE / GRANDPARENTING OPTIONS
Senior Administration supports early admission, for 2017-18 of kindergarten students, and siblings,
residing in the Fairmont PS attendance area to be re-designated to Tweedsmuir PS. As identified
in section 1.0 of the Attendance Areas for Students Procedure (No. 4012)
Where space is available, circumstances where an out-of-area exemption request may be
considered include … students attending schools involved in the Accommodation Review
process may be allowed exemptions to minimize potential transitions for students.
The Principal of the receiving school, with the Superintendent of Student Achievement, shall
consider the approval of the Out-of-Area exemption requests.
On 2015 April 14, the Board approved the following motion (found in Appendix O) as part of the
Southeast London Attendance Area Review:
THAT the Grade 8 students, and their siblings, residing in the area designated to the
proposed Southeast London Elementary School, as per Map 1, be eligible to remain at
their current designated school for the year of opening only, of the new school, with
transportation if eligible, in order to graduate with their peers.
As part of the feedback received from the School Subcommittees, there was a request to allow
Holding Zone students the option to remain with their peers at the proposed Tweedsmuir PS.
Senior Administration supports the expansion of the above option for both Fairmont PS and
Tweedsmuir PS Holding Zone students for the grade 8 students for 2018-19.
As Fairmont PS is recommended to close, the grandparenting option is not available for the
2018-19 grade 8 students.
CO-BUILD COLLABORATION OPPORTUNITY
In accordance with the Community Planning and Partnership Guideline and the TVDSB’s
Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Procedure, a potential co-build opportunity will be
circulated to Community Organizations for Tweedsmuir PS.
EPAR-02 IMPLEMENTATION
TRANSPORTATION
Transportation eligibility is based on distance; students who reside greater than 1.6 kms away from
an elementary school site qualify for school bus service. Southwestern Ontario Student
Transportation Services (STS) determines distance measurements using Geographic Information
Software (GIS) based software and the municipal road and walkway network. Once the school
board approves the school attendance area, STS establishes a transportation boundary in its
planning software and develops a transportation solution at the time of implementation. Families
are respo
service.
Exemptio
STS has
The asse
year so th
Exemptio
Maximum
The max
service a
Bus route
planning
bus route
usually 2
because
to estima
School A
STS does
amount o
Notificatio
STS post
www.myb
year. Pa
received
PROPOS
The imple
Educatio
YEAR
2017
2018
2019
We buil
onsible for de
ons to Distanc
a process to
essment is co
hat the most c
ons to Distanc
m Length of a
imum length o
re on the bus
es are planne
scenario due
es tend to be
5-35 minutes
they are trave
ate a potential
A to School B
s annual rout
of time studen
on of Eligibilit
ts transportat
bigyellowbus.
rents/guardia
log in informa
SED IMPLEM
ementation of
n approval, w
DATE
May 2
May 23
June
Fall
Winter
Winter
June 30
July 01
September
ld each stud
Pa
termining how
ce Based Elig
determine if a
mpleted by S
current “on th
ce Based Elig
Bus Ride
of a bus ride
s 30 minutes o
ed using curre
e to the uncert
10-20 minute
. If a student
eling a greate
l change in rid
in the family c
e planning, th
nts spend in tr
ty
ion eligibility f
.ca. This prov
ans will be not
ation for pare
MENTATION S
f Senior Adm
would be comp
ACTION
Public D
Decision
Board s
for an a
Board re
Design
Design
Transitio
Closure
Consolid
01 Tweeds
dent’s tomor
age 8 of 10
w a student w
gibility Criteria
an Exemption
STS staff appr
he ground” co
gibility Criteria
in TVDSB is 7
or less.
ent student da
tainty of wher
es long. Coun
is attending a
er distance ov
de time is to t
car and then
hey try to mak
ransit each da
for the followi
vides families
tified by letter
nt portals.
SCHEDULE
inistration’s re
pleted as follo
N
Delegation to
n of the Board
submits Capita
ddition and re
eceives notific
Committee is
and construc
on and Namin
e of Fairmont
dation / amalg
smuir PS open
rrow, every
will get to/from
a
n to Distance
roximately 4 m
onditions are c
a is available
70 minutes o
ata, so it can b
re actual futur
ty bus routes
a specialty pr
ver larger atte
think about ho
consider the
ke routes as e
ay.
ing school ye
time to plan w
r regarding tra
ecommendat
ows:
the Board
d on EPAR-0
al Priorities re
enovations at
cation of Min
s formed and
ction process
ng Committee
PS
gamated atte
ns with additi
day
m school if the
Based Eligib
months before
considered. In
online at www
ne way. 88%
be difficult to
re students w
s are longer be
rogram ride tim
endance area
ow long it wou
bus stops to
efficient as po
ear by mid-Ap
well in advan
ansportation e
tions, continge
02
equest for app
t Tweedsmuir
istry funding
begins meeti
begins
es are formed
endance area
on and renov
ey do not qual
bility Criteria is
e the start of
nformation on
w.mybigyellow
of students o
predict actua
will live. Gener
ecause of the
mes may be l
as. A good rul
uld take to tra
pick up stude
ossible to min
ril at
ce of the com
eligibility by m
ent upon Min
proval and fu
r PS
ng
d and begins
vations
lify for bus
s warranted.
the school
n
wbus.ca.
on STS
al times in a
rally, urban
e geography,
longer
e of thumb
avel from
ents. When
nimize the
ming school
mid-May and
istry of
nding
meeting
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 9 of 10
Design Committee
A Design Committee will be established to provide input regarding the design of the proposed
addition and renovations at Tweedsmuir PS. This committee will convene as needed, in order to
establish a design for the school which meets the standards of the Board. The final design,
estimated costs and schedule will then be presented to the Board of Trustees for approval.
Transition Committee
A Transition Committee will be formed to establish activities to ensure a smooth transition for
students and to provide input to Senior Administration regarding memorabilia and resources
provided by parent groups contained within the current schools. Membership of the Transition
Committee includes the current school administrators and parent representation from each school.
Naming Committee
A Naming Committee will be established in order to give consideration to naming a new school or
re-naming an existing school, as per the Naming of Schools Policy and Procedure (No. 2016) of
the Board. Community input will be received and considered by the Naming Committee. The
Naming Committee shall recommend their choice of school name to the Board for consideration.
System Consolidation Committee
A System Consolidation Committee will monitor the implementation of the approved
recommendations. This on-going System Committee convenes monthly for the coordination of
services associated with modifications to pupil accommodation which may include new schools,
additions, renovations, closures and other facility enhancement initiatives of the Board. The
TVDSB System Consolidation Committee is comprised of representative from Senior
Administration, Director’s Services, Learning Support Services, Facility Services, Human Resource
Services, Financial Services and Southwestern Ontario Student Transportation Services (STS).
SUMMARY
The TVDSB is committed to providing quality education to students through programs and facilities
that support academic achievement and well-being, and ensuring effective stewardship of the
resources of the Board.
It is the policy of Thames Valley District School Board to: provide our students with
accommodation which supports student achievement, safety and well-being; ensure the
long-term sustainability of our school system; identify opportunities for collaborative facility
arrangements with community organizations; and manage our resources effectively, in a
manner which is well-informed, well-coordinated, transparent and sustainable.
(Pupil Accommodation Policy - No. 4015)
The student population in this area of London has stabilized over the past 5 years with no
significant residential growth within the study area that TVDSB is proposing for the consolidation of
the two elementary schools. This consolidation will allow for this City of London’s planning district
to have a school community which is viable and sustainable. The Board will be able to enhance
program opportunities for the Hamilton Road and Jackson community district’s and sustain student
accommodation now and in the future.
Based on careful consideration of demographics, program offerings, historical and projected
enrolment trends, location of existing students and facility size/condition, Senior Administration’s
recommendations have been developed to provide enhanced learning opportunities for students
and address the long term accommodation needs of the Board. This consolidation of schools will
reduce the unfunded space operated by the Board and reduce long term renewal and operating
costs.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 10 of 10
Cost/Savings: ANNUAL SAVINGS
As indicated in the Financial Analysis of the ISAR (Appendix A, page 15 of 20), it has been
calculated that there would be an annual taxpayer savings of $628,500 through the recommended
consolidation.
It should be noted that through the proposed consolidation, closure and disposition of Fairmont PS,
the Board will remove $4,012,350 of high and urgent renewal needs identified at Fairmont PS.
CAPITAL COSTS
Estimated cost for design and construction:
Tweedsmuir PS: $ 3,503,000
Implementation of the recommendations to close Fairmont PS and to consolidate students at
Tweedsmuir PS is dependent upon Ministry of Education approval and funding of the capital
construction, for both the new Southeast London Elementary School as well as the addition and
renovations at Tweedsmuir PS. Both projects will be submitted through Capital Priorities Grant
Program in June 2017.
Timeline: As noted in the report.
Communications: A letter will be sent home to the parents of EPAR-02 regarding the Board decision and will indicate
next steps in the process.
Appendices: A. Initial Senior Administration Report
B. Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review Timeline
C. Minutes from the 2016 November 22 Board Meeting
D. Orientation Meeting
E. Post-Determination Meeting
F. Initial Public Meeting
G. Second Public Meeting
H. Final Public Meeting
I. Fairmont PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
J. Fairmont PS: Subcommittee Final Report
K. Tweedsmuir PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
L. Tweedsmuir PS: Subcommittee Final Report
M. Community Organizations and Public Q&A and Input
N. Correspondence received to TVDSB Trustees and Director of Education
O. Southeast London Attendance Area Review
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☒ Putting students first. ☒ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☐ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☒ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
The Appendices for the Final Senior Administration Reports: EPAR 01 and 02 (Items 13.d and 13.e) on
the agenda may be found in the materials previously provided in binder form to trustees.
They also are posted to the 'TVDSB Planning' First Class conference under the following folders:
"2017.05.23_EPAR-01 FINAL PACKAGE"
and
"2017.05.23_EPAR-02 FINAL PACKAGE".
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 1 of 33
Date of
Meeting:
Posted Online: March 27
2017 April 11
2017 May 23
Item #:
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐ Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☐ Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF REPORT:
FINAL SENIOR ADMINISTRATION REPORT – ELEMENTARY PUPIL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW 01
PRESENTED BY:
Kevin Bushell, Executive Officer, Facility Services and Capital Planning
PRESENTED FOR: ☒ Approval ☐ Information ☐ Advice
Recommendation(s): 1. THAT Sparta Public School, located at 45885 Sparta Line, St.Thomas, close effective
2018 June 30.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
2. THAT New Sarum Public School, located at 9473 Belmont Road, St.Thomas, close
effective 2020 June 30, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding
for the new Belmont Public School and the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
3. THAT South Dorchester Public School, located at 48614 Crossley Hunter Line, Belmont,
close effective 2020 June 30 and be declared surplus, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
4. THAT Springfield Public School, located at 51336 Ron McNeil Line, Springfield, close
effective 2020 June 30 and be declared surplus, contingent upon Ministry of Education
approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
5. THAT Westminster Central Public School, located at 2835 Westminster Drive, London,
close effective 2020 June 30 and be declared surplus, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
6. THAT the Port Stanley Public School new attendance area be approved as per Figure 03,
effective 2018 July 01.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
7. THAT an addition and renovations be constructed for student accommodation and
program enhancement at Port Stanley Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
8. THAT an Attendance Area Review be conducted during the 2017-18 school year, for the
creation of a French Immersion Public School located at Sparta Public School, effective
2018 July 01.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 2 of 33
9. THAT the grade 7 and 8 French Immersion and Extended French Immersion program be
relocated from Port Stanley Public School to either Sparta Public School or Pierre Elliott
Trudeau French Immersion Public School, effective 2018 July 01, as per the decision of
the Board following a French Immersion Attendance Area Review.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
10. THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations, by email, of the
potential co-build opportunity at Port Stanley Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
11. THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to renaming Port Stanley
Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
12. THAT a new junior kindergarten to grade 8 elementary school be constructed in the village
of Belmont, opening 2020 September 01, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval
of capital funding.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
13. THAT the new Belmont Public School attendance area be approved as per Figure 01,
effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding
for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
14. THAT the River Heights Public School junior kindergarten to grade 3 attendance area be
approved as per Figure 02, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of Education
approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
15. THAT the Northdale Central Public School grade 4 to grade 8 attendance area be
approved as per Figure 02, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of Education
approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
16. THAT a renovation for program enhancements be completed at Northdale Central Public
School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
17. THAT the Davenport Public School grade 7 students and siblings, residing in the area to
be accommodated at the new Belmont Public School and registered as of 2020 March 01,
be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020-21 school year, to remain at
Davenport Public School, with transportation if eligible, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
18. THAT the Northdale Central Public School grade 7 students and siblings, residing in the
area designated to the new Belmont Public School and registered as of 2020 March 01, be
provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020-21 school year, to remain at Northdale
Central Public School, with transportation if eligible.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
19. THAT the Summers’ Corners Public School grade 7 students and siblings, residing in the
area to be accommodated at the new Belmont Public School and registered as of 2020
March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020-21 school year, to remain
at Summers’ Corners Public School, with transportation if eligible, contingent upon Ministry
of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
20. THAT the Board post on-line and notify the listed Community Organizations by email of the
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 3 of 33
potential co-build opportunity at the new Belmont Public School, contingent upon Ministry
of Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
21. THAT a Design Committee be established to provide input regarding the design of the new
Belmont Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding
for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
22. THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to naming the new
Belmont Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding
for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
23. THAT Davenport Public School configuration change to a grade 4 to grade 8 elementary
school, effective 2018 July 01.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
24. THAT the Davenport Public School grade 4 to grade 8 attendance area be approved as
per Figure 04, effective 2018 July 01.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
25. THAT the McGregor Public School configuration change to a junior kindergarten to grade
3 elementary school, as of 2018 July 01.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
26. THAT the McGregor Public School junior kindergarten to grade 3 attendance area be
approved as per Figure 04, effective 2018 July 01.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
27. THAT renovations for program enhancements be completed at McGregor Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
28. THAT renovations for program enhancements be completed at Davenport Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
29. THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations by email, of the
potential collaboration opportunity at McGregor Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
30. THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations by email, of the
potential collaboration opportunity at Davenport Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
31. THAT the Summers’ Corners Public School junior kindergarten to grade 8 attendance area
be approved as per Figure 05, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Belmont Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
32. THAT renovations for program enhancements be completed at Summers’ Corners Public
School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
33. THAT a new junior kindergarten to grade 8 elementary school be constructed in the
southeastern area of the City of St. Thomas, opening 2020 September 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas
Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
34. THAT the new junior kindergarten to grade 8 Southeast St. Thomas Public School
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 4 of 33
attendance area be approved as per Figure 06, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
35. THAT a portion of the Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone be permanently accommodated
at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School as of 2020 July 01, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
36. THAT the Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone grade 7 students and siblings residing in
the area to be accommodated at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School and
registered as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020-21
school year, to remain at Port Stanley Public School, with transportation if eligible,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St.
Thomas Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
37. THAT the Mitchell Hepburn Public School junior kindergarten to grade 8 attendance area
be approved as per Figure 07 effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
38. THAT the Mitchell Hepburn Public School grade 7 students and siblings residing in the
area to be accommodated at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School and registered
as of 2020 March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020-21 school year,
to remain at Mitchell Hepburn Public School, with transportation if eligible, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
39. THAT a portion of the Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone be permanently
accommodated at Mitchell Hepburn Public School as of 2020 July 01, contingent upon
Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public
School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
40. THAT the Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone grade 7 students and siblings residing in
the area to be accommodated at Mitchell Hepburn Public School and registered as of 2020
March 01, be provided the “grandparenting option” for the 2020-21 school year, to remain
at Port Stanley Public School, with transportation if eligible, contingent upon Ministry of
Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
41. THAT the Board post on-line and notify listed Community Organizations by email of the
potential co-build opportunity at the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas
Pubic School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
42. THAT a Design Committee be established to provide input regarding the design of the new
Southeast St. Thomas Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
43. THAT a Naming Committee be established to give consideration to the naming of the new
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 5 of 33
Southeast St. Thomas Public School, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas Public School.
DEFERRED TO 2017 MAY 23
44. THAT the Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review-01 (EPAR-01) Committee be
disbanded.
APPROVED 2017 APRIL 11
Purpose:
The purpose of this Final Senior Administration Report (FSAR) is to provide the Board with a
summary of EPAR-01, information on the community consultation process and Senior
Administration’s final recommendations for student accommodation for EPAR-01.
Content: BACKGROUND
The pupil accommodation review process can result in many debates regarding how best to
educate students in school communities faced with declining student numbers and outdated
facilities. To make the process of accommodation even more challenging declining enrolment
within the Thames Valley District School Board (TVDSB) is not evenly distributed. The population
of school age children in some communities has resulted in significant growth and over-capacity
schools, while others have had a reduction resulting in under-capacity schools. Despite these
challenges an important part of educating students is appropriate accommodation. The TVDSB
must respond to the challenging distribution of students by using accommodation reviews to
ensure schools are located in the areas where they are most needed.
The school consolidation debate is not a new one. It has long been a difficult process for school
boards. One and two room classrooms that once dotted the rural landscape in the 1800s and
early 1900s were later replaced by larger schools and now the realities of globalization, declining
birth rates and the industrialization of agriculture have resulted in changing work patterns and
shifts in residential locations. In order to manage enrolment resulting from shifting demographic
patterns in both urban and rural settings, the Ontario Ministry of Education released a new set of
guidelines for the consolidation of schools in 2015 March.
The Ministry’s Guide to Pupil Accommodation Reviews states that: “school boards generally
consolidate and close schools to enable improved educational options and opportunities for
students” (Ontario Ministry of Education, p.4, 2016). Some of these improvements include: a
range of programs and courses, the availability of specialized support services, access to
specialized facilities, sufficient number of students to support sports teams, diverse extracurricular
activities, better school buildings and also improved accessibility features (Ontario Ministry of
Education, 2016).
The benefits for both current and future students are often challenged by adult concerns regarding
the impact of consolidation on communities, which can also lead to political tensions. However,
school boards have an accountability to ensure that now and future students experience their
education within positive learning environments. The TVDSB must respond and react to
population shifts and changes in order to offer quality educational experiences to students which
prepare them for global citizenship and the needs of the 21st Century. In order to ensure effective
accommodation planning, the board must plan for the future. While the consolidation process may
present concerns for current stakeholders, long range planning for the needs of all students must
continue to be a priority for the TVDSB. Schools are often viewed as a focal point of the
community – a place where generations of adults maintain a sentimental connection to their
formative years as students. Despite fears that communities will be lost through consolidation,
vibrant new communities were created as one-room school houses grew into larger and larger
facilities. History suggests that the best school communities are created when administrators,
teachers, parents, family and community members join together with the common purpose of
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 6 of 33
providing the highest quality learning experience for children – regardless of the size or location of
the school building.
As the Ministry’s Guide to Pupil Accommodation Reviews states, “Since school boards are mainly
funded on a per-student basis through grants from the Ministry of Education, boards, and therefore
schools, lose funding as their enrolment declines” (Ontario Ministry of Education, p.4, 2016). As
this funding decreases, the costs of maintaining empty pupil places increases. The reality of this
funding model is that the TVDSB must respond if we are to continue to operate schools in a
sustainable manner. Small schools are more expensive to operate than larger schools. However,
school size does not affect the board’s continuing priority to offer the best educational experiences
to all students. The focus then must be on the best interests of all students, their learning needs
and aspirations and their futures in a world that is changing. Failure to proactively respond to
issues that result from declining enrolment, will limit student choices. Therefore, Senior
Administration created the recommendations for EPAR-01. These recommendations provide the
TVDSB with a strategy that will allow the Board to move forward in a manner that will provide all
students enhanced learning opportunities.
PARAMETERS OF EPAR-01
The lens through which Senior Administration reviewed the accommodation of students in EPAR-
01, and structured the final recommendations, was filtered by the following questions:
Have any issues been identified as a priority of the Board?
Within EPAR-01, there are three accommodation issues which are a priority for the Board to
resolve.
The first concern is the three low enrolment schools (Westminster PS at 82 students, Port Stanley
PS English track at 94 students and Springfield PS at 167 students). Enrolment at all three schools
are projected to remain stable over the next 10 years. Low enrolment schools are difficult to staff
and the average cost per student is above the Board average.
The second accommodation issue within EPAR-01 is the number of empty pupil places located in
the 12 schools that make up this PAR. Based on 2015-16 data, there were 1,156 empty pupil
places within EPAR-01, with school utilization factors that range from 27% to 111%. These empty
pupil places do not receive any accommodation funding from the Ministry of Education and must
be funded from the Board’s overall per pupil accommodation grant, which consequently reduces
funding for all schools in the Board.
The third accommodation challenge with EPAR-01 is the current overcrowding at Mitchell Hepburn
Public School (PS). In 2015-16, Mitchell Hepburn PS was operating at 111% capacity (with 75
students over its capacity). The Mitchell Hepburn PS attendance area still has the potential for
additional residential development. In 2013, the Board approved a Holding Zone to designate
students from ongoing residential development to Port Stanley PS to relieve enrolment pressure at
Mitchell Hepburn PS. As Holding Zones are a temporary solution, the residential development in
Southeast St. Thomas will need to be permanently accommodated eventually. The projected
growth will exceed the capacity limitations at the existing surrounding schools, therefore,
construction of the new Southeast St. Thomas PS is warranted.
Is the current situation sustainable (with respect to enrolment projections, school
utilization, and facility renewal/condition)?
The current student accommodations within EPAR-01 are not sustainable. The projected
enrolment, school utilization and deferred facility renewal does not warrant keeping all 12 schools
within EPAR-01 open and operating.
The projected recommendation reduces the empty pupil places by 421 and allows for an average
school utilization rate of 85%. Also, with the closure of the 4 identified schools, $17.8M of high and
urgent renewal needs will be removed from the Board’s deferred renewal list.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 7 of 33
Does the current situation provide equity of programming for all of our students?
The Board strives to provide equity of programming for all of our students. Due to the low
enrolment and number of small schools within EPAR-01, the Board must proportionally allocate
resources to ensure the integrity of the program at these schools. This impacts other schools in
the system where there may be a greater need. The current Ministry of Education per pupil
funding model requires the Board to average out the funding for all of our students. Keeping these
low enrolment schools open negatively affects the funding available for programming for all
TVDSB students.
Is there an opportunity to improve student learning?
Through the proposed construction of 2 new elementary schools, and the proposed program
enhancements of Library Learning Commons, general art and kindergarten classrooms, as well as
Developmental Centres, the Board will not only maintain but improve the educational experience at
the remaining schools.
Is the current situation financially sustainable (with respect to funding available)?
The operational costs to maintain, clean, and heat the 1,156 empty pupil places are not funded.
The staffing and learning resources to deliver the academic programs to our students are also
funded per pupil. Smaller class sizes puts pressure on the funding formula due to the lack of
flexibility. This funding shortfall must be subsidized by the system as a whole.
As indicated in the recommended solution section of the ISAR (Appendix A, page 64 of 71) the
average cost per student for the proposed recommendations will be below the current board
average.
Are there any potential facility collaboration opportunities with community organizations?
In keeping with the TVDSB’s Community Planning and Facility Organization Procedure (4015b),
the Board will circulate the co-build opportunity to listed community organizations for both the new
Belmont PS and new Southeast St. Thomas PS.
It should also be noted that the Board is currently working on a collaboration opportunity with the
London-Middlesex Consolidated Municipal Services Manager (CMSM) to construct a child care
facility at River Heights PS, which will not only service the village of Dorchester for child care, but
will also remove 75 empty pupil places at the school.
The Board will also circulate the collaboration opportunities to community organizations to lease
space at McGregor PS and Davenport PS.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 8 of 33
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS ENGAGEMENT / CONSULTATION WITH SCHOOL
COMMUNITIES
On 2016 April 12, the Planning Department presented the Draft Elementary Accommodation Study
Report to the Board of Trustees, a high-level report of observations on accommodation issues in
the TVDSB that are being monitored closely. Identified in the Study was Elgin-Middlesex 01,
consisting of Davenport PS, McGregor PS, Mitchell Hepburn PS, New Sarum PS, Northdale
Central PS, Port Stanley PS, River Heights PS, South Dorchester PS, Sparta PS, Springfield PS,
Summers’ Corners PS and Westminster Central PS.
Further, on November 22, 2016, after receiving and carefully considering the Initial Senior
Administration’s Report - Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review 01 (EPAR-01), the Board
approved the initiation of a Pupil Accommodation Review (PAR) involving the schools identified in
the Elgin-Middlesex 01 study area.
Key to the Pupil Accommodation Review process is consultation with community organizations,
municipalities, school communities and the general public.
Community Organizations and Municipalities
Long term planning and analysis of existing needs for school boards, municipalities and community
organizations allows for collaborative accommodation planning and strong communities. The
TVDSB reaches out to community organizations and municipalities to ensure that the direction of
the TVDSB’s long term planning corresponds with municipal planning. Communication with
community organizations allows for analysis and synchronization of needs through the potential of
utilizing schools with available space or co-build opportunities.
Preliminary consultation with community organizations and municipalities began on June 15, 2016
with the Community Planning & Facility Collaboration Annual Meeting.
In September 2016, the Board approved staff to contact listed community organizations regarding
the possible establishment of a PAR, requesting any technical planning information and any
possible collaboration opportunities with the schools to be studied. A Post-Determination meeting
was held on December 14, 2016 to explain Senior Administration’s recommendations and
opportunities for input.
Community organizations were also given the opportunity to submit written comments regarding
the EPAR-01 for Trustee consideration. As of 2017 March 21, 4 submissions have been received
and have been included in Appendix HH.
School Communities and the Public
Following the Board’s decision to initiate a Pupil Accommodation Review, a webpage for EPAR-01
was created on the Board website with important and up-to-date PAR information for the general
public. The website contains information about: the PAR process, important dates, agendas and
meeting minutes, presentations and reports, as well as any other related documents.
Newspaper advertisements and social media were utilized by the Board to share information and
communicate with the public concerning EPAR-01 through the TVDSB Engage webpage,
Facebook, and Twitter.
School Principals kept their school communities informed through school webpages, newsletters,
school council meetings, and by encouraging parents to contact them or the Board with any
questions or concerns regarding the Pupil Accommodation Review.
EPAR-01 School Subcommittees
At the Initial and Second Public meetings, information was presented to the School Subcommittees
with an opportunity for Subcommittees to ask questions of the TVDSB directly for clarification. The
agenda, minutes and presentations for the Initial, Second and Final Public Meetings can be found
in Appendix F, Appendix G, and Appendix H. A minimum of two School-level meetings were held
for each School Subcommittee to share information and gather feedback from their school
community. The Planning department received and answered 350 questions of clarification from
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 9 of 33
the School Subcommittees and the public through the Planning Department’s email. The
(questions and) answers were emailed directly to all of the PAR members and also posted on the
TVDSB’s Planning website for public access. These questions and answers from each school can
be found in Appendix I, Appendix K, Appendix M, Appendix O, Appendix Q, Appendix S, Appendix
U, Appendix W, Appendix Y, Appendix AA, Appendix CC, Appendix EE, Appendix GG.
REPORTS OF THE PAR SCHOOL SUBCOMMITTEE(S)
Each EPAR-01 School Subcommittee completed its task to provide feedback on the Initial Senior
Administration Report (2016 November 22) on behalf of their school communities in accordance
with the TVDSB procedure. At the Final Public Meeting, held March 8th 2017, the Subcommittees
from each school presented their reports.
The School Subcommittee reports can be found as the following Appendices:
J. Davenport Public School
L. McGregor Public School
N. Mitchell Hepburn Public School
P. New Sarum Public School
R. Northdale Central Public School
T. Port Stanley Public School
V. River Heights Public School
X. South Dorchester Public School
Z. Sparta Public School
BB. Springfield Public School
DD. Summers’ Corners Public School
FF. Westminster Central Public School
Appreciation is extended to the Pupil Accommodation Review Committee members for the work
completed, the time spent, and the careful deliberations of the members. The work of PAR School
Subcommittee members and input received from community organizations/municipalities
contributes to many voices helping to ensure that a range of possibilities are considered in order to
optimize program opportunities for the maximum number of students.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION REVIEW OF SCHOOL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS,
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION AND PUBLIC INPUT
As part of the revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines, TVDSB is required to consider
feedback received from the School Subcommittees, community organizations and the public. All
input received has been reviewed and taken under advisement.
As a result of the input received from School Subcommittees, community organizations and the
public, Senior Administration has made the following revisions from the original recommendations
found in the Initial Senior Administration Report:
• The proposed attendance area for River Heights PS and Northdale Central PS students
to the new Belmont PS has been adjusted.
• The proposed attendance areas for the existing New Sarum PS students has been
adjusted to either the new Belmont PS or the new Southeast St. Thomas PS.
• The attendance area adjustment of Summers’ Corners PS students to McGregor PS and
Davenport PS has been removed.
RECOMM
Boards m
aging fac
Administr
support a
proposed
projected
It should
that prima
do not dif
sizes, cla
load prim
maximum
utilization
on schoo
making th
The follow
recomme
* Indicates t
Senior Ad
Heights P
in orange
places at
at Daven
The Fina
laid out th
geograph
detailed d
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
Students (FTE)We buil
MENDED SO
must address
cilities as well
ration believe
a range of opp
d recommend
d enrolment w
be noted that
ary classes a
fferentiate arc
asses will ofte
mary classroom
m of 20 studen
n is often abso
ls with a large
he school app
wing chart illu
ended solution
the utilization exc
dministration
PS, McGregor
e and remove
River Height
port PS as of
l Senior Adm
he Initial Seni
hic regions: N
descriptions o
86%
OTG Capacity
Historical Enrolm
Projected Enrolm
ld each stud
Pa
LUTION
the impacts a
as overcrowd
s it is in the b
portunities in
ations will be
with capacity, m
t the Ministry
re capped at
chitecturally fr
n move within
ms different th
nts) can only
orbed in a sch
e primary coh
pear less occu
ustrates the to
n.
cluding French Im
has recomme
r PS and Dav
d from the OT
ts PS as of 20
f 2020-21.
inistration Re
or Administra
North, South,
of the effects o
76%
Senior A
Enrolm
ment
ment French Imme
dent’s tomor
ge 10 of 33
and costs of d
ding in newly
best interest o
programming
nefit students
maximize res
of Education
20 students,
rom junior or
n a school fro
han junior or i
operate at a m
hool with junio
hort or only pr
upied.
otal enrolmen
mmersion enrolm
ended collabo
venport PS. A
TG in the abo
017-18, 69 pu
port recomme
ation Report (
East, and We
of the propos
%*76%
80%
School Y
Administrati
ment and Cap
ersion
rrow, every
declining enro
developed re
of students to
g, extracurricu
s with enhanc
sources and im
Primary Clas
can impact s
intermediate
om year to ye
intermediate.
maximum util
or and interm
rimary classes
t and capacity
ment
oration opport
As such the fo
ove chart for c
upil places at
endations for
ISAR), the PA
est. This will
sed recommen
90%
86%
Year
ions Recom
pacity for E
Collab
Proje
Proje
day
olment, exces
esidential area
maintain sch
ular activities
ced program o
mprove schoo
ss Size (PCS
school utilizati
classrooms.
ar. The Minis
As a result,
lization of 86.
mediate classe
s often skews
y for EPAR-0
rtunities to fill
ollowing capa
collaboration
McGregor PS
r EPAR-01 are
AR area has
allow for a fo
ndations.
%
mmended
PAR 01
boration Opportun
cted Enrolment Ex
cted Enrolment H
ss space in sc
as. Senior
hool populatio
and services
opportunities,
ol utilization.
) initiative, wh
on. Primary
Depending o
stry does not
primary class
.9%. This low
es. The impa
s the school u
01 as a result
available spa
acity has been
opportunities
S as of 2018-
e comprehen
been grouped
ocused analys
84%
nities
xisting Community
olding Community
chools and
ons that
. The
, harmonize
hich dictates
classrooms
on cohort
identify or
ses (with a
wer
ct of PCS
utilization,
of the
ace at River
n identified
: 75 pupil
19, and 23
nsive and as
d into four
sis and
%
y
y
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 11 of 33
NORTHERN REGION
In the Northern Region, TVDSB students will be accommodated in the new Belmont PS, River
Heights PS and Northdale Central PS.
Senior Administration’s recommendations for this region encompass the following:
Creation of a new Belmont PS and attendance area.
New Sarum PS closes and a portion of the attendance area is designated to the new
Belmont PS.
South Dorchester PS closes and is declared surplus; the attendance area is designated
to the new Belmont PS.
The portion of Davenport PS attendance area (congruent with South Dorchester PS) is
designated to the new Belmont PS.
Springfield PS closes and is declared surplus; a portion of the attendance area is
designated to the new Belmont PS.
The portion of Summers’ Corners PS attendance area (congruent with Springfield PS) is
designated to the new Belmont PS.
Westminster Central PS closes and is declared surplus; a portion of Westminster Central
PS attendance area is designated to the new Belmont PS.
A portion of the River Heights PS /Northdale Central PS attendance area is designated
to the new Belmont PS.
ENROLMENT & CAPACITY
The following graphs indicate the resulting enrolment and the capacity for the schools in the
Northern Region:
New Belmont Public School
The new Belmont PS will open in 2020-21 with over 500 students and a utilization of 89%. The
facility will accommodate students from 8 school communities which will balance the enrolment and
capacity for the future. The new school population will achieve one of the Board’s priorities within
this EPAR, which is to reduce the challenges of low enrolment at 4 of the schools and allow for a
more efficient school with enhanced facilities.
89%85%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
New Belmont PS ‐Enrolment and Capacity
OTG Capacity
Historical Enrolment
Projected Enrolment
Existing Community
River He
The impa
appear as
of standa
and 96%
River Hei
collabora
Child and
drop in en
Northdal
In 2020, N
Belmont
implemen
River Hei
to experie
new Belm
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
We buil
eights Public
act of PCS at
s if the facility
ard classroom
utilization, ra
ights PS will o
tion opportun
d Family Prog
nrolment, by r
le Central Pu
Northdale Ce
PS. The relo
nted in 2017-1
ights PS and
ence resident
mont PS will a
River Heights
Northdale Ce
ld each stud
Pa
School
River Heights
y is not fully u
m loading (23)
ather than the
operate at 85
nity. The Mini
grams Centre
removing load
ublic School
ntral PS utiliz
cation of the
18.
Northdale Ce
tial growth in
allow for addit
8
s PS ‐Enrolme
93%
86%
8
entral PS ‐Enro
dent’s tomor
ge 12 of 33
s PS, with onl
tilized. If the
, the school w
calculated O
% utilization i
istry of Educa
at River Heig
ded space fro
zation drops b
Gifted progra
entral PS are
the communi
tional spaces
89%
90%
85%
nt and Capacit
88%
78%
olment and Ca
rrow, every
ly Early Years
school was l
would have a
OTG capacity
in 2020, after
ation has app
ghts PS. This
om the OTG c
by 10% due to
am to Orchard
located in Do
ty. The stude
for increased
ty
apacity
day
s and Primary
oaded using
PCS OTG ca
of 375 and ut
r 75 pupil plac
roved funding
collaboration
capacity of th
o the relocatio
d Park PS (25
orchester, wh
ent population
d enrolment d
93%
Collab
OTG C
Projec
Comm
Histor
79%
OTG C
Projec
Existin
Histor
y classes, ma
PCS loading
apacity of 348
tilization of 89
ces are remov
g of a Child C
n will help bala
e school.
on of students
5 Students) w
ich has and w
n being desig
due to residen
boration Opportun
Capacity
cted Enrolment Ex
munity
rical Enrolment
Capacity
cted Enrolment
ng Community
rical Enrolment
akes it
(20) instead
8 in 2018
9%.
ved for a
Care and
ance the
s to the new
will be
will continue
gnated to the
ntial growth.
nities
xisting
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 13 of 33
ATTENDANCE AREA
Figure 01 - Proposed new Belmont PS (junior kindergarten to grade 8) attendance area, effective
2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new
Belmont PS.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 14 of 33
Figure 02 - Proposed River Heights PS (junior kindergarten to grade 3) and Northdale Central PS
(grades 4 to 8) attendance area, effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of Education
approval of capital funding for the new Belmont PS.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 15 of 33
PROPOSED FACILITY ENHANCEMENTS
Senior Administration is recommending the construction of a new junior kindergarten to grade 8
Elementary School located in the Village of Belmont. As indicated in the recommended solution
section of the ISAR (Appendix A, page 35 of 71) the new Belmont PS is proposed to have an OTG
capacity of 576, consisting of 4 kindergarten and 20 standard classrooms, a gymnasium and
primary activity room, Library Learning Commons, General Arts room, and learning support room.
Senior Administration is recommending program enhancements to Northdale Central PS. As a
junior and intermediate school, instrumental music is part of the intermediate curriculum; therefore
Senior Administration is recommending a General Arts room renovation.
GRANDPARENTING OPTION
The grandparenting option is not available for the 2019-20 New Sarum PS, South Dorchester PS,
Springfield PS and Westminster Central PS grade 7 students, as those schools are recommended
to close.
The grandparenting option will be available for the 2019-20 Davenport PS, Northdale Central PS,
and Summers’ Corners PS grade 7 students, and siblings, for the 2020-21 school year, designated
to the new Belmont PS.
CO-BUILD COLLABORATION OPPORTUNITY
In accordance with the Community Planning and Partnership Guideline and the TVDSB’s
Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Procedure, a potential co-build opportunity will be
circulated to Community Organizations for the new Belmont PS.
TVDSB and the Consolidated Municipal Services Manager (CMSM) for London-Middlesex
submitted a joint request to the Ministry of Education for funding to create a Child Care and Child
and Family Program Centre at River Heights PS to resolve the service gap in the Dorchester area.
On 2017, January 20 the Board received confirmation of approval and funding for this project.
Design and construction of this project will begin later this year.
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE - NORTHERN REGION
YEAR DATE ACTION
2018 Winter Board submits School Consolidation Capital (SCC) Priorities
request for approval and funding for the new Belmont PS
Spring Board receives notification of Ministry funding
Fall New Belmont PS Design Committee (New Sarum, Northdale
Central, River Heights, South Dorchester, Springfield, Westminster
Central) is formed and begins meeting
Northdale Central PS design and construction begins
2019 Spring New Belmont PS - Construction process begins
2020 Winter New Belmont PS Transition Committees (New Sarum, Northdale
Central, River Heights, South Dorchester, Springfield, Westminster
Central) are formed and begin meeting
June 30 New Sarum PS, South Dorchester PS, Springfield PS and
Westminster Central PS - Closures
July 01 New Belmont PS, River Heights PS, Northdale Central PS -
Consolidation and amalgamated attendance areas in effect
September 01 New Belmont PS opens
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 16 of 33
SOUTHERN REGION
In the Southern Region, TVDSB students will be accommodated at Port Stanley PS and Sparta
French Immersion PS.
Senior Administration’s recommendations for this region include the following:
Sparta PS closes and the attendance area is designated to Port Stanley PS.
An Attendance Area Review for French Immersion in Elgin County is conducted.
French Immersion program opens in the Sparta PS facility.
ENROLMENT & CAPACITY
The following graph indicates the resulting enrolment and capacity for the school in the Southern
Region:
Port Stanley Public School
The consolidation of Port Stanley PS English track and Sparta PS enrolment at Port Stanley PS
will result in 89% utilization in 2020. In the interim, the utilization will be higher at 104% due to the
Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone students, until 2020 when the new Southeast St. Thomas PS
opens.
It is expected that the enrolment at the consolidated Port Stanley PS will remain relatively stable
with a small increase due to residential development from the Port Stanley community. The
consolidation of the two elementary schools will alleviate the issue of low enrolment and allow for a
solution to the accommodation issue for the French Immersion program in Elgin County.
104%
89%
92%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Port Stanley PS ‐Enrolment and Capacity
OTG Capacity
Projected Enrolment
Holding Community
Projected Enrolment
French Immersion
Projected Enrolment
Existing Community
Historical Enrolment
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 17 of 33
ATTENDANCE AREA
Figure 03 - Proposed Port Stanley PS attendance area, effective 2018 July 01.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 18 of 33
PROPOSED FACILITY ENHANCEMENTS
Senior Administration is recommending an addition and renovations be constructed for student
accommodation and program enhancements to meet TVDSB standards at Port Stanley PS. New
construction will include the addition of a new Library Learning Commons and a kindergarten
classroom. Renovations will create two additional standard classrooms along with improvements
to accessibility.
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
EPAR-01 examined English track accommodation, while French Immersion and Extended French
Immersion accommodation was outside the purview of the study. On 2016 January 12, the Board
approved the following motion:
THAT Port Stanley Public School become an interim dual track school offering both
junior kindergarten to grade 8 in English and grades 7 to 8 in French Immersion and
Extended French Immersion, effective 2016 July 01.
Without a Board decision to close a school, the French Immersion accommodation issue cannot be
permanently resolved. Senior Administration has proposed that, following the Board decision to
close Sparta PS, an Attendance Area Review be conducted during the 2017-18 school year, to
address the accommodation pressure that exists in the elementary French Immersion programs in
Elgin County.
EARLY ATTENDANCE/GRANDPARENTING OPTION
Kindergarten students, and their siblings, being re-designated to Port Stanley PS, would be eligible
for early attendance, without transportation, for the 2017-18 school year.
The grandparenting option is not available for the 2018-19 Sparta PS grade 7 students, as the
school is recommended to close.
The grandparenting option will be available for the Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone 2019-20
grade 7 students designated to Mitchell Hepburn PS and new Southeast St.Thomas PS to remain
at Port Stanley PS for their grade 8 year.
CO-BUILD COLLABORATION OPPORTUNITY
In accordance with the Community Planning and Partnership Guideline and the TVDSB’s
Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Procedure, a potential co-build opportunity will be
circulated to Community Organizations for Port Stanley PS.
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE - SOUTHERN REGION
YEAR DATE ACTION
2017 Fall An Attendance Area review be conducted for the French
Immersion Program serving Elgin County
Design and construction process begins for Port Stanley PS
2018 Winter Port Stanley Transition Committees (Port Stanley, Sparta) are
formed and begin meeting
June 30 Sparta PS - Closure as an English track school
July 01 Port Stanley PS - Consolidation of students / amalgamated
attendance area
French Immersion program redirected to Sparta PS facility
September 01 Port Stanley PS - Consolidated school opens with new
accommodation
New French Immersion school opens in Sparta PS facility
Note: Senior Administration is proposing that the above project be funded through various means, including
Ministry of Education Capital grants or self-funding. If Capital grants are not approved the proposed project
can still proceed.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 19 of 33
EASTERN REGION
In the Eastern Region, TVDSB students will be accommodated at Davenport PS, McGregor PS
and Summers’ Corners PS.
Senior Administration’s recommendations for this region encompass the following:
McGregor PS becomes junior kindergarten to grade 3.
Davenport PS becomes grade 4 to grade 8.
A portion of Springfield PS attendance area is designated to Summers’ Corners Public
School.
ENROLMENT & CAPACITY
The following graphs indicate the resulting enrolment and the capacity for the schools in the
Eastern Region:
McGregor Public School
In 2017, McGregor PS will have a utilization of 65%. With the relocation of the grade 4 program to
Davenport PS, proposed program enhancements and the allocation of 69 spaces for potential
collaboration opportunities, McGregor PS will have a utilization rate of 76% in 2018.
The impact of PCS at McGregor PS, with only early years and primary classes, makes it appear as
if the facility is not fully utilized. If the school was loaded using PCS loading (20) instead of
standard classroom loading (23), the school would have a PCS OTG capacity of 342 in 2018 and
83% utilization, rather than the calculated OTG capacity of 372 and utilization of 76%.
Davenport Public School
65%
76%73%
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
McGregor PS ‐Enrolment and Capacity
Collaboration Opportunities
OTG Capacity
Projected Enrolment
Existing Community
Historical Enrolment
70%
89%81%
76%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Davenport PS ‐Enrolment and Capacity
Collaboration Opportunity
OTG Capacity
Projected Enrolment Existing
Community
Historical Enrolment
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 20 of 33
Davenport PS is projected to be at 70% utilization in 2017-18. In addition to the grade 4 students
being relocated from McGregor PS in 2017-18, the enrolment will remain elevated for two years
until the intermediate students residing in the South Dorchester PS attendance area are
permanently accommodated at the new Belmont PS. In 2020-21, 23 pupil places have been
removed from Davenport PS OTG, for a potential community collaboration opportunity, resulting in
an OTG of 380 and utilization of 81%.
Senior Administration is proposing renovations and collaboration opportunities at Davenport PS
and McGregor PS, following the restructuring of the junior program, which will help with the drop in
utilization through the removal of loaded space from the OTG capacity of the schools.
ATTENDANCE AREA
Figure 04 - Proposed McGregor PS (junior kindergarten to grade 3) and Davenport PS (grade 4
to grade 8) attendance area, effective 2018 July 01.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 21 of 33
PROPOSED FACILITY ENHANCEMENTS
Senior Administration is recommending renovations be constructed for program enhancement to
meet TVDSB standards at McGregor PS and Davenport PS.
As indicated in the recommended solution section of the ISAR (Appendix A, page 48 of 71), a
renovated Library Learning Commons, General Arts room, relocation of the main office to the front
of the school, and barrier free enhancements are proposed at McGregor PS.
As indicated in the recommended solution section of the ISAR (Appendix A, page 51 of 71), a
renovated Library Learning Commons and General Arts room are proposed at Davenport PS.
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
The Special Education department has confirmed the relocation of both the primary and
junior/intermediate program classes from McGregor PS and Davenport PS to Summers’ Corners
PS effective 2017-18.
COLLABORATION OPPORTUNITY
In accordance with the Community Planning and Partnership Guideline and the TVDSB’s
Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Procedure, a potential collaboration opportunity will
be circulated to Community Organizations for McGregor PS and Davenport PS.
ENROLMENT & CAPACITY
Summers’ Corners Public School
The utilization at Summers’ Corners PS is projected to be 73% in 2017-18 before the realignment
of the attendance area to include a portion of the Springfield PS students. In 2020-21, with the
consolidation of students from Springfield PS and renovations for student accommodation and a
Developmental Education suite, the utilization at Summers’ Corners PS will be 92%.
73%
75%
92%87%
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Summers' Corners PS ‐Enrolment and Capacity
OTG Capacity
Projected Enrolment
Existing Community
Historical Enrolment
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 22 of 33
ATTENDANCE AREA
Figure 05 - Proposed Summers’ Corners PS junior kindergarten to grade 8 attendance area,
effective 2020 July 01, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the
new Belmont PS.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 23 of 33
PROPOSED FACILITY ENHANCEMENTS
Senior Administration is recommending renovations be constructed for student accommodation
and program enhancements to meet TVDSB standards at Summers’ Corners PS. Renovations
will include a Library Learning Commons, a Developmental Education suite and the creation of an
additional kindergarten classroom.
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
The Special Education department has confirmed the relocation of both the primary and
junior/intermediate program classes from McGregor PS and Davenport PS to Summers’ Corners
PS effective 2017-18.
EARLY ATTENDANCE/GRANDPARENTING OPTION
Kindergarten students, and their siblings, being re-designated to Summers’ Corners PS from
Springfield PS would be eligible for early attendance, without transportation, for the 2019-20 school
year.
No grandparenting option is required for the Eastern region.
COLLABORATION OPPORTUNITY
Due to the change in the proposed attendance areas, from the ISAR, and the resulting increased
utilization, no collaboration opportunities will be available at Summers’ Corners PS.
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE - EASTERN REGION
YEAR DATE ACTION
2018 Winter Davenport Transition Committees (McGregor, Davenport) are
formed and begin meeting
McGregor/Davenport - Design and construction process begins
September 01 McGregor/Davenport - new grade configuration (junior
kindergarten-3 /Gr.4-8) implemented
2020 Winter Summers’ Corners PS Transition Committees (Springfield,
Summers’ Corners) are formed and begin meeting Summers’
Corners - Design and construction process begins
June 30 Springfield PS - Closure
July 01 Summers’ Corners PS - Consolidation and amalgamated
attendance area in effect
September 01 Summers’ Corners PS - Consolidated school opens
Note: Senior Administration is proposing that the above projects be funded through various means, including
Ministry of Education Capital grants or self-funding. If Capital grants are not approved the proposed projects
can still proceed.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 24 of 33
WESTERN REGION
In the Western Region, TVDSB students will be accommodated at the new Southeast St. Thomas
PS and Mitchell Hepburn PS.
Senior Administration’s recommendations for this region encompass the following:
Creation of a new Southeast St. Thomas PS and attendance area.
A portion of Mitchell Hepburn PS attendance area is designated to the new Southeast
St.Thomas PS.
A portion of New Sarum PS attendance area is designated to the new Southeast
St.Thomas PS.
The Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone be permanently accommodated at the new
Southeast St. Thomas PS and Mitchell Hepburn PS.
ENROLMENT & CAPACITY
The following graphs indicate the resulting enrolment and the capacity for the schools in the
Southern Region:
Mitchell Hepburn Public School
Southeast St. Thomas Public School
Note: The proposed Mitchell Hepburn PS and New Southeast St. Thomas PS projected enrolment includes
only development which is currently circulated and under construction.
The division of the Mitchell Hepburn PS attendance area between Mitchell Hepburn PS and the
new Southeast St. Thomas PS, and the relocation of a portion of the New Sarum PS students to
the new school, of which 76 of these students currently reside within the City of St. Thomas, will
allow for proper accommodation of the students without overcrowding and will allow for future
growth which is contained in these attendance areas.
The Southeast St. Thomas Holding Zone students currently accommodated at Port Stanley PS
would be permanently accommodated at new Southeast St. Thomas PS and Mitchell Hepburn PS.
115%
87%
78%
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Mitchell Hepburn PS ‐Enrolment and Capacity
OTG Capacity
Projected Enrolment
Existing Community
Historical Enrolment
91%
93%
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
New Southeast St. Thomas PS ‐Enrolment and Capacity
OTG Capacity
Projected Enrolment
Existing Community
Historical Enrolment
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 25 of 33
ATTENDANCE AREA
Figure 06 - Proposed new Southeast St. Thomas PS attendance area, effective 2020 July 01,
contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St.
Thomas PS.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 26 of 33
Figure 07 - Proposed Mitchell Hepburn PS attendance area, effective 2020 July 01, contingent
upon Ministry of Education approval of capital funding for the new Southeast St. Thomas PS.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 27 of 33
PROPOSED FACILITY ENHANCEMENTS
Senior Administration is recommending the construction of a new junior kindergarten to grade 8
Elementary School located in Southeast St. Thomas. As indicated in the recommended solution
section of the ISAR (Appendix A, page 58 of 71) the new Southeast St.Thomas PS would have an
OTG capacity of 516, consisting of 4 kindergarten and 17 standard classrooms, 1 Special
Education classroom, a gymnasium and primary activity room, a Library Learning Commons,
General Arts room and learning support room.
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
Final placement of the self-contained Transition class currently located at New Sarum PS is
outside the purview of this process. The placements of all self-contained Special Education
program classes are at the discretion of the Special Education department.
GRANDPARENTING OPTION
The grandparenting option is not available for the 2020-21 New Sarum PS grade 7 students, as
New Sarum PS is recommended to close.
The grandparenting option will be available for the Mitchell Hepburn PS 2019-20 grade 7 students,
and siblings, designated to new Southeast St.Thomas PS.
CO-BUILD COLLABORATION OPPORTUNITY
In accordance with the Community Planning and Partnership Guideline and the TVDSB’s
Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Procedure, a potential co-build opportunity will be
circulated to Community Organizations for the new Southeast St.Thomas PS.
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE - WESTERN REGION
YEAR DATE ACTION
2018 Winter Board submits School Consolidation Capital (SCC) Priorities
request for approval and funding for the new Southeast St.Thomas
PS
Spring Board receives notification of Ministry funding
Fall New Southeast St.Thomas Design Committee (Mitchell Hepburn,
New Sarum, Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone) is formed and
begins meeting
2019 Spring New Southeast St.Thomas PS - Construction process begins
2020 Winter New Southeast St.Thomas PS Transition Committees (Mitchell
Hepburn, New Sarum, Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone) are
formed and begin meeting
June 30 New Sarum PS - Closure
July 01 Mitchell Hepburn PS - New attendance area
New Southeast St.Thomas PS - Consolidation and amalgamated
attendance area in effect
September 01 Mitchell Hepburn PS - Consolidated school opens
New Southeast St.Thomas PS - Opens
EPAR-01
EARLY A
Senior Ad
the attend
the Atten
W
c
p
The princ
consider
TRANSP
Transpor
from an e
Transpor
Software
board ap
planning
are respo
service.
Exemptio
STS has
The asse
year so th
Exemptio
Maximum
The max
the bus 3
Bus route
planning
bus route
usually 2
because
to estima
School A
STS does
amount o
Notificatio
STS post
www.myb
year. Pa
receive lo
We buil
1 IMPLEMEN
ATTENDANC
dministration
dance area to
ndance Areas
Where space
considered inc
process may b
cipal of the re
the approval
PORTATION
rtation eligibili
elementary sc
rtation Service
(GIS) based
proves the sc
software and
onsible for de
ons to Distanc
a process to
essment is co
hat the most c
ons to Distanc
m Length of a
imum length o
30 minutes or
es are planne
scenario due
es tend to be
5-35 minutes
they are trave
ate a potential
A to School B
s annual rout
of time studen
on of Eligibilit
ts transportat
bigyellowbus.
rents/guardia
ogin informati
ld each stud
Pa
NTATION
E
supports earl
o be re-design
for Students
is available, c
clude … stud
be allowed ex
ceiving schoo
of the Out-of
ty is based o
chool site qua
es (STS) dete
software and
chool attenda
d develops a t
termining how
ce Based Elig
determine if a
mpleted by S
current “on th
ce Based Elig
Bus Ride
of a bus ride
less.
ed using curre
e to the uncert
10-20 minute
. If a student
eling a greate
l change in rid
in the family c
e planning, th
nts spend in tr
ty
ion eligibility f
.ca. This prov
ans will be not
on for parent
dent’s tomor
ge 28 of 33
ly admission
nated when a
Procedure (N
circumstance
ents attendin
xemptions to
ol, with the Su
f-Area exemp
n distance. S
alify for schoo
ermines distan
d the municipa
nce area, ST
transportation
w a student w
gibility Criteria
an exemption
STS staff appr
he ground” co
gibility Criteria
is 70 minutes
ent student da
tainty of wher
es long. Coun
is attending a
er distance ov
de time is to t
car and then
hey try to mak
ransit each da
for the followi
vides families
tified by letter
portals.
rrow, every
of kindergarte
and where ava
No. 4012)
es where an o
g schools inv
minimize pote
uperintendent
tion requests
tudents who
ol bus service
nce measure
al road and w
TS establishes
n solution at th
will get to/from
a
n to distance-
roximately 4 m
onditions are c
a is available
s one way. 88
ata, so it can b
re actual futur
ty bus routes
a specialty pr
ver larger atte
think about ho
consider the
ke routes as e
ay.
ing school ye
time to plan w
r regarding tra
day
en students, a
ailable. As id
out-of-area ex
volved in the A
ential transitio
t of Student A
s.
reside greate
. Southweste
ements using
walkway netwo
s a transporta
he time of imp
m school if the
based eligibil
months before
considered. In
online at www
8% of student
be difficult to
re students w
s are longer be
rogram ride tim
endance area
ow long it wou
bus stops to
efficient as po
ear by mid-Ap
well in advan
ansportation e
and siblings,
dentified in se
xemption requ
Accommodati
ons for studen
Achievement,
er than 1.6 km
rn Ontario St
Geographic I
ork. Once th
ation boundar
plementation
ey do not qual
lity criteria is w
e the start of
nformation on
w.mybigyellow
ts on STS ser
predict actua
will live. Gener
ecause of the
mes may be l
as. A good rul
uld take to tra
pick up stude
ossible to min
ril at
ce of the com
eligibility by m
residing in
ection 1.0 of
uest may be
ion Review
nts.
shall
ms away
udent
nformation
e school
ry in its
. Families
lify for bus
warranted.
the school
n
wbus.ca.
rvice are on
al times in a
rally, urban
e geography,
longer
e of thumb
avel from
ents. When
nimize the
ming school
mid-May and
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 29 of 33
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Below is a comprehensive chart including the implementation timelines for the Senior
Administration’s EPAR-01 recommendations, contingent upon Ministry of Education approval of
Capital funding.
YEAR TIMING ACTION
2017 Spring Public Delegation to the Board on May 02
2017 Spring Decision of the Board on EPAR-01, May 23
2017 Fall French Immersion Attendance Area Review
2017 Fall Port Stanley PS - Design and construction process begins
2018 Winter McGregor/Davenport Transition Committees are formed and begin
meeting
2018 Winter Port Stanley Transition Committees (Port Stanley, Sparta) are formed
and begin meeting
2018 Winter McGregor/Davenport - Design and construction process begins
2018 Winter New Belmont PS - Board submits School Consolidation Capital
(SCC) Priorities request for approval and funding in January
2018 Winter New Southeast St.Thomas PS - Board submits School Consolidation
Capital (SCC) Priorities request for approval and funding in January
2018 Winter Northdale Central PS - Design and construction process begin
2018 Spring New Belmont PS - Board receives notification of Ministry funding
2018 Spring New Southeast St.Thomas PS - Board receives notification of
Ministry funding
2018 Summer Sparta PS - Closure as an English track school as of June 30
2018 Summer Port Stanley PS - Consolidation of students/amalgamated attendance
area as of July 01
2018 Summer French Immersion program redirected to Sparta facility as of July 01
2018 Fall McGregor/Davenport PSs - new grade configuration (JK-3/Gr.4-8)
implemented September 01
2018 Fall New French Immersion school opens in Sparta facility September 01
2018 Fall Port Stanley PS - Consolidated school opens September 01 with
addition
2018 Fall
New Belmont PS Design Committee (New Sarum, Northdale Central,
River Heights, South Dorchester, Springfield, Westminster Central) is
formed and begins meeting
2018 Fall
New Southeast St.Thomas PS Design Committee (Mitchell Hepburn,
New Sarum, Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone) is formed and
begins meeting
2019 Spring New Belmont PS - Construction begins
2019 Spring New Southeast St.Thomas PS - Construction begins
2020 Winter
New Southeast St.Thomas PS Transition Committees (Mitchell
Hepburn, New Sarum, Southeast St.Thomas Holding Zone) are
formed and begin meeting
2020 Winter Summers’ Corners PS Transition Committees (Springfield, Summers'
Corners) are formed and begin meeting
2020 Winter Summers’ Corners PS - Design and construction process begins
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 30 of 33
YEAR TIMING ACTION
2020 Winter
New Belmont PS Transition Committees (New Sarum, Northdale
Central, River Heights, South Dorchester, Springfield, Westminster
Central) are formed and begin meeting
2020 Summer New Sarum PS, South Dorchester PS, Springfield PS and
Westminster Central PS - Closures as of June 30
2020 Summer Mitchell Hepburn PS - Consolidation and amalgamated attendance
area in effect as of July 01
2020 Summer New Belmont PS - Consolidation and amalgamated attendance area
in effect as of July 01
2020 Summer New Southeast St.Thomas PS - Consolidation and amalgamated
attendance area in effect as of July 01
2020 Summer Summers’ Corners PS - Consolidation and amalgamated attendance
area as of July 01
2020 Fall New Belmont PS - Opens September 01
2020 Fall New Southeast St.Thomas PS - Opens September 01
2020 Fall Mitchell Hepburn PS - Consolidated school opens September 01
2020 Fall Summers’ Corners PS - Consolidated school opens September 01
DESIGN COMMITTEE(S)
A Design Committee will be established to provide input regarding the design of additions and
renovations or a new school. This committee will convene as needed, in order to establish a
design for the school which meets the standards of the Board. The final design, estimated costs
and schedule will then be presented to the Board of Trustees for approval.
A Design Committee is not established if the proposed addition or renovations do not increase the
square footage significantly. If a Design Committee is not required, in accordance with the Board’s
criteria, the Principal will work with Facility Services and a Board appointed architect for the
proposed addition/renovations. Communication between the Principal, School Council and the staff
will keep the school community informed as design plans are developed.
TRANSITION COMMITTEE(S)
A Transition Committee will be formed to establish activities which will ensure a smooth transition
for students and to provide input to Senior Administration regarding memorabilia and resources
provided by parent groups contained within the current schools. Membership of the Transition
Committee includes the current school administrators and parent representation from each school
involved in the transition.
NAMING COMMITTEE(S)
A Naming Committee will be established in order to give consideration to naming a new school or
re-naming an existing school, as per the Naming of Schools Policy and Procedure (No. 2016) of
the Board. Community input will be received and considered by the Naming Committee. The
Naming Committee shall recommend their choice of school name to the Board for consideration
SYSTEM CONSOLIDATION COMMITTEE
A System Consolidation Committee will monitor the implementation of the approved
recommendations. This on-going system committee convenes monthly for the coordination of
services associated with modifications to pupil accommodation which may include new schools,
additions, renovations, closures and other facility enhancement initiatives of the Board. The
TVDSB System Consolidation Committee is comprised of representatives from Senior
Administration, Director’s Services, Learning Support Services, Facility Services, Human Resource
Services, Financial Services and Southwestern Ontario Student Transportation Services (STS).
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 31 of 33
SUMMARY
The TVDSB is committed to providing quality education to students through programs and facilities
that support academic achievement and well-being, while ensuring effective stewardship of the
resources of the Board.
It is the policy of Thames Valley District School Board to: provide our students with
accommodation which supports student achievement, safety and well-being; ensure the
long-term sustainability of our school system; identify opportunities for collaborative facility
arrangements with community organizations; and manage our resources effectively, in a
manner which is well-informed, well-coordinated, transparent and sustainable.
(Pupil Accommodation Policy, No. 4015)
Senior Administration’s proposed recommendations for EPAR-01 will achieve the following:
Construction of 2 new elementary schools for existing enrolment and future growth
Provide program enhancements to 5 existing schools
Reduce empty pupil places by 421
Improve the utilization rate from 74% (2015) to 85% (2020)
Remove $17.8M of high and urgent renewal needs from TVDSB inventory
Reduce the average cost per student for administration, Facility Services and IT from
$1352.11 to $1190.52
All consolidated schools will have a projected enrolment of greater than 300 students
Provide estimated annual savings in excess of $400,000 to the taxpayer
Potential for child care facilities in TVDSB schools in Dorchester, Belmont and St.
Thomas.
Based on careful consideration of demographics, program offerings, historical and projected
enrolment trends, location of existing students and facility size/condition, Senior Administration’s
recommendations have been developed to provide enhanced learning opportunities for students
and address the long term accommodation needs of the Board. This consolidation of schools will
reduce the unfunded space operated by the Board and reduce long term renewal and operating
costs.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 32 of 33
Cost/Savings: ANNUAL SAVINGS
As indicated in the Financial Analysis of the ISAR (Appendix A, page 63 of 71), it has been
calculated that there would be an annual taxpayer savings of $413,300 through the recommended
consolidation.
It should be noted that Financial Services has determined no material change in the estimated
annual savings as a result of this revised recommendation from the ISAR to FSAR.
Also, through the proposed consolidations, closures and disposition of New Sarum PS, South
Dorchester PS, Springfield PS and Westminster Central PS the Board will remove $17,784,122 of
identified high and urgent school renewal needs.
ESTIMATED COST FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION (Including Site Cost)
New Schools Project Cost
Belmont Public School $ 14,557,930
Southeast St.Thomas Public School $ 13,006,870
New Schools Total $ 27,564,800
The new Belmont PS and new Southeast St.Thomas PS are contingent upon Ministry of Education
approval and funding of the capital construction.
Senior Administration is proposing that the following projects be funded through various means,
including Ministry of Education Capital grants or self-funding.
Proposed renovations at Northdale Central PS.
Proposed addition and renovations at Port Stanley PS.
Proposed renovations at McGregor PS (junior kindergarten-3).
Proposed renovations at Davenport PS (grades 4 to 8).
Proposed renovations at Summers’ Corners PS.
If Capital grants are not approved the proposed projects can still proceed.
Additions, Renovations and Program Enhancements Project Cost
Davenport Public School $ 693,000
McGregor Public School $ 779,000
Northdale Central Public School $ 144,000
Port Stanley Public School $ 1,666,000
Summers’ Corners Public School $ 901,000
Additions, Renovation and Program Enhancements Total $ 4,183,000
Total estimated Capital for the implementation of Senior Administration’s recommendations is
$31,747,800.
Timeline: As noted in the report.
Communications: A letter will be sent home to the parents of EPAR-01 regarding the Board decision and will indicate
next steps in the process.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Page 33 of 33
Appendices: A. Initial Senior Administration Report
B. Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review Timeline
C. Minutes from the 2016 November 22 Board Meeting regarding the ISAR
D. Orientation Meeting
E. Post-Determination Meeting
F. Initial Public Meeting
G. Second Public Meeting
H. Final Public Meeting
I. Davenport PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
J. Davenport PS: Subcommittee Final Report
K. McGregor PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
L. McGregor PS: Subcommittee Final Report
M. Mitchell Hepburn PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
N. Mitchell Hepburn PS: Subcommittee Final Report
O. New Sarum PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
P. New Sarum PS: Subcommittee Final Report
Q. Northdale Central PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
R. Northdale Central PS: Subcommittee Final Report
S. Port Stanley PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
T. Port Stanley PS: Subcommittee Final Report
U. River Heights PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
V. River Heights PS: Subcommittee Final Report
W. South Dorchester PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
X. South Dorchester PS: Subcommittee Final Report
Y. Sparta PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
Z. Sparta PS: Subcommittee Final Report
AA. Springfield PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
BB. Springfield PS: Subcommittee Final Report
CC. Summers’ Corners PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
DD. Summers’ Corners PS: Subcommittee Final Report
EE. Westminster Central PS: Subcommittee Q&A Documents
FF. Westminster Central PS: Subcommittee Final Report
GG. Community Organizations and Public Q&A Input
HH. Correspondence Received to TVDSB Trustees and Director of Education
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☒ Putting students first. ☒ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☐ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☒ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Date of
Meeting: 2017, May 23
Item #:
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐ IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐ Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☒ Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐ Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF REPORT: Implementation Plan for installation of AEDs in all schools in TVDSB beginning in September 2017.
PRESENTED BY: Lynne Griffith-Jones, Superintendent of Human Resources
PRESENTED FOR: ☒ Approval ☐ Information ☐ Advice
Recommendation(s): That the Board of Trustees approve the implementation plan for the installation of AEDs in all schools in
TVDSB beginning in September 2017.
That the Board of Trustees include in the budget initiatives to provide funds in the amount of $20,000
annually to support the maintenance of AEDs.
Purpose: Senior Administration is presenting for consideration an alternative plan to the Trustees’AED budget
initiative.
Content: The Board will commit to the installation of AEDs in all schools over a 3‐5 year period looking at
approximately 40 schools per year.
The Board will seek funding/donations from community groups/municipalities for the purchase of Board
approved AEDs.
The purchased/donated AED unit will meet the Board requirements.
The Board will be responsible for the installation, training and ongoing maintenance of AEDs.
The new Board Policy and Procedure will reflect the commitment to install AEDs in all schools and the
necessary components of the implementation plan.
The implementation plan will be reviewed annually to ensure that there is appropriate funding available
from the community to facilitate the purchase of AEDs.
We have received the following advice from OSBIE:
• once AEDs are placed in schools it will be the Board's responsibility to ensure that they are maintained
and in proper working order;
• it is the Board's responsibility to ensure that staff are trained on how to use the AED;
• there should be a policy and procedure in place to ensure consistency for all schools;
• for a community group who is using our facilities outside and who will not have access to the AED
inside the school, we must communicate to them upon booking that they will not have access to an
AED and will need to bring their own if necessary;
• if a community group is using space inside the school then the AED must be available and
communicated to the group where it is located;
• the AED cannot be in a locked office, it has to be readily available in the school;
• the AED cabinets have alarms on them so that if a student opens it when they shouldn't then anyone in
the vicinity will be aware that it has been opened.
Cost/Savings: Purchase of AED = $1,885.94 (Funding to be provided by community)
Maintenance of AED = $20,000 annually. (Funding source – Trustee Multi‐purpose Fund)
Timeline: Effective September 2017
Communications:
Appendices:
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☒ Putting students first. ☒ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☒ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☒ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Date of
Meeting: 2017 May 23
Item #:
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐
IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐
Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☐
Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐
Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF
REPORT:
Secondary English as a Second Language (ESL)/English Literacy Development (ELD) Staffing
PRESENTED BY: Riley Culhane, Superintendent of Student Achievement, Learning Support Services
PRESENTED FOR: ☒ Approval ☐ Information ☒ Advice
Recommendation(s): That the Board of Trustees approve, in advance of the budget approval in June 2017, the hiring of
3.0 FTE permanent Secondary English as a Second Language (ESL)/English Literacy
Development (ELD) teachers effective September 1, 2017.
Purpose: To ensure sufficient ESL/ELD staffing lines for our secondary schools.
Content: Currently, our approved Secondary ESL/ELD staffing allocation equates to 25.17 FTE Secondary
ESL/ELD teachers. Based on staffing requests from secondary schools for the 2017 -2018 school
year, this allocation has already been deployed. There are continued requests for additional
ESL/ELD staffing lines from schools. We are bringing forward this request prior to approval of the
2017-2018 board budget to allow school administrators to establish complete timetables for
students requiring ESL/ELD programming.
Attached for your reference is the 2017-2018 Budget Discussion Template – Secondary ESL/ELD
Staffing which was presented to the Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee meeting on March
28, 2017.
Cost/Savings: Salary costs equate to $316,733.00 inclusive of benefits. There is ESL funding generated in the
GSN based on the number of students who have immigrated to Canada during the last four years
and who were born in a country where the official language is not English.
Timeline: September 1, 2017
Communications: Administrative Council
Board of Trustees
Human Resource Services
OSSTF
Appendices: 2017-2018 Budget Discussion Template – Secondary ESL/ELD Staffing
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☒ Putting students first. ☐ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☒ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
forms.
☒ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working
environments.
☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
2017-2018 Budget Discussion Template
Alignment with TVDSB Commitments and Mission, Vision:
☒ Putting students first. ☐ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☐ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☐ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☒ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
Please state in one sentence how your initiative aligns with the board’s strategic plan.
As leaders in public education we have pledged to take responsibility for our students by allocating appropriate resources ~
in this case, appropriate staffing allocations
Topic
Increase of FTE for Secondary ESL/ELD staffing
Department
Learning Support Services - Languages Portfolio
Detailed description of initiative or proposed reduction.
Last year the FTE for Secondary ESL/ELD programming was increased to 25.17 FTE to meet the
continued increasing population of Secondary Newcomer students (including International fee-paying
students). As a result of an additional increase of approximately 210 students between Aug ust 8 and
September 28, 2016 all ESL/ELD staffing lines were allocated to schools. For semester two, additional
lines were allocated by District Staffing to Westminster SS (8 lines), HB Beal SS (5 lines), Montcalm SS
(3 lines) and Aspire (3 lines). As of January 2017, we have confirmed 22 fee-paying International
students, with a potential for up to 45 students in total. For the fall of 2017, Sir F Banting SS will be
offering ESL programming, which will ease the overpopulation at HB Beal SS and reduce some
transportation costs.
In order to support the anticipated additional secondary newcomer students and to alleviate the need for
District staffing to use their staffing lines to support ESL/ELD programming, we would like t o request an
additional 3.0 FTE.
Why should this be considered a priority for 2016-17 budget development process?
Ensuring sufficient staffing in order to meet student needs is integral to student success.
In what way does this contribute to student achievement or what impact will the reduction have?
The additional FTE will reduce the number of students who are currently receiving incomplete timetables
as a result of insufficient staffing lines.
Impact to other departments or programs in relation to student achievement.
This initiative would have budgetary implications for other departments. Funding these additional tea chers
may mean a reduction in funding in other areas of the board.
Possible funding sources.
Our newcomer students are generating additional ESL funding. The additional ESL students who
registered with TVDSB in 2016-2017 (above projections) resulted in ESL funding increases of
approximately $1,300,000.00. Costing for 3.0 FTE additional secondary ESL/ELD teachers is
approximately $308,000.00 with salary and benefits.
☒ Proposed FTE change (staff addition/reduction)
☐ Additional permanent staff
☐ Additional casual staff
☐ Supplies and services to support initiative
☐ Fees and contracts to support initiative
☐ Other
Potential budget impacts related to this initiative (check all that apply).
How will outcomes be measured?
This outcome will be measured through a variety of student achievement data (report card marks, credit
accumulation, EQAO math and OSSLT)
Other information requested
Other Comments
☒ Permanent
☐ One-Time
☐ Pilot Years
☐ Other
Submitted by: ☐ Trustee Sue Bruyns/ Riley Culhane
Name
☒ Administrative Council
Approval by Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee
for administration to prepare report, based on above request: Date:
For Finance Use Only
Proposed Budget Initiative/Reduction
Term of Initiative
2016-2017 2017-2018
Approved Proposed Increase /
Budget Budget ( Decrease )
Proposed FTE Change (Staff Addition/Reduction) 0
Revenue or Current Budget Reassignment 0
Expenses
Permanent Salaries & Benefits 0
Casual Salaries & Benefits 0
Supplies & Services 0
Fees & Contracts 0
Other 0
Total Expenses 0 0 0
Net Addition/Reduction to 2016-2017 Budget 0
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Date of
Meeting: 2017 May 23
Item #: 13.h
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐
IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐
Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☐
Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐
Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF REPORT:
Additional Vision Staffing for 2017-18
PRESENTED BY:
Sheila Builder, Superintendent of Student Achievement
Christine Beal, Superintendent of Business Services
Andrea Leatham, Learning Supervisor- Special Education
Jeremy Knight, Manager, Business Services
Sandra Macey, Manager, Finance
PRESENTED FOR: ☒ Approval ☐ Information ☐ Advice
Recommendation(s): That the Board of Trustees approves, in advance of the budget approval process in June, the addition and
hiring of 1.4 FTE Vision Resource Teachers and 3.0 FTE Educational Assistants (Transcribers) to the
Proposed Special Education Budget for 2017-18.
Purpose: To meet the support students with vision needs through additional staffing for 2017-18.
Content: Within the past three weeks, the Special Education Department has been informed of new students with
significant vision needs. Preliminary assessments have been conducted by our Vision Teachers and the
students will require the instruction/ support of specialized Vision Resource Teachers and Transcribers (EAs).
We would like to include this staffing in the budget in order to plan accordingly to support these students.
Cost/Savings: 1.4 FTE Elementary Teachers- $137, 806.20
3.0 FTE EAs- $146,526.54
Total- $284, 332.74
Timeline: May 16: Planning and Priority Advisory Committee
May 23: Board of Trustees- Approval prior to budget debate
May 30: SEAC (update on new student needs)
May 30: Board of Trustees- Budget Presentation (included in updated staffing sheet)
June 20: Board of Trustees- Budget Debate/ Approval (included in updated staffing sheet)
Communications: Admin. Council
SEAC
Board of Trustees
Appendices: None
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☒ Putting students first. ☒ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☒ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☐ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☒ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Date of
Meeting: 2017 May 23
Item #:
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐
IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐
Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☐
Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐
Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF REPORT:
Additional Learning Supervisor- Special Education
PRESENTED BY:
Sheila Builder, Superintendent of Student Achievement, Learning Support Services
PRESENTED FOR: ☐ Approval ☒ Information ☐ Advice
Recommendation(s): That the Board of Trustees approve, in advance of the budget approval in June 2017, the hiring of an
additional 1.0 FTE Learning Supervisor- Special Education, effective September 1, 2017.
Purpose: To share the recommendation to the Board to approve, in advance of the budget the approval of the
additional Learning Supervisor for Special Education.
Content: A budget initiative has been submitted to request the approval of an additional Learning Supervisor for the
Special Education Department. This initiative is to support the supervision and leadership of the
department which consists of over 100 teaching staff and 60 itinerant educational assistants; in addition
this Learning Supervisor will provide, in collaboration with the existing Learning Supervisor, additional
leadership to respond to school concerns, support professional learning for school a dministrators/ school
staff and lead processes/procedures related to providing Special Education programs and services.
With the approval of this additional Learning Supervisor, in advance of the budget approval in J une, the
hiring process can occur before the end of the school year and Senior Administration can plan accordingly
for a vacancy in the system.
Cost/Savings: $130, 527
Timeline: Administrative Council- May 23, 2017
Board of Trustees- May 23, 2017
SEAC- May 30, 2017
Human Resources- May 31, 2017
Communications: Administrative Council
SEAC
Board of Trustees
Human Resources
Appendices: None
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☒ Putting students first. ☒ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☐ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☒ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.
REPORT OF THE FIRST NATIONS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (FNAC) MEETING
2017 April 18
3:06 p.m. to 4:18 p.m.
MEMBERS ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS
P. Schuyler, Trustee (Chair)
B. Antone, Oneida Nation of the Thames
O. Correia, Munsee-Delaware Nation
D. Grosbeck, Chippewas of the Thames
M. Reid, Trustee
S. Smith, Oneida Nation of the Thames
B. Summers, Oneida Nation of the Thames
P. McKenzie, Superintendent of Student Achievement
P. Skinner, FNMI Learning Supervisor
J. Bennett, Trustee
C. Camillo, FNMI Learning Coordinator
M. Deeb, Principal H.B. Beal S.S.
W. Deleary, Student Advocate, Oneida Nation of the
Thames
M. Ferdinand, Coordinator School Counselling &
Social Work Services
C. Friesen, Principal B. Davison S.S.
B. Keast, Corporate Services
N. Luo, Research & Assessment Services (-3:54)
S. McGahey-Albert, FNMI Education Advisor
S. Nugent, Special Education/Information Technology,
Learning Coordinator (-3:54)
C. Sanders, Teacher on Special Assignment
S. Spence, System Development & Support,
Supervisor (-3:54)
P. Spicer, Principal Delaware Central P.S.
B. White, Principal Saunders S.S.
Regrets:
L. Cribbs, Vice-Principal S.D.C.I.
M. Fisher, Munsee- Delaware Nation
F. Huff, Chippewa of the Thames
B. McKinnon, Trustee
A. Morell, Trustee
J. Patterson, Vice-Principal Saunders S.S.
L. Williams, Principal Lambeth P.S
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting convened at 3:06 p.m. at B. Davison Secondary School, 785 Trafalgar Street.
P. Schuyler welcomed two B. Davison students. The students led a smudging ceremony and shared
upcoming and ongoing activities and events at B. Davison.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – The agenda was approved on motion.
3. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared
4. REPORT OF MEETING- 2017 March 21 – provided for information.
5. BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES
a. Achievement Data (item #6b)
Electronic communication from the 2017 March 21 presentation will be re-sent to committee
members.
6. PROGRAM SPOTLIGHT
a. Student Sharing
P. McKenzie introduced L. Nuo, S. Nugent, and S. Spence. S. Nugent presented the client portal that
will allow community partners real time access to student attendance data. The tool is going to be
tested at H.B. Beal over the next few weeks.
Administration answered questions of clarification regarding privacy, consent, security concerns, staff
responsibility, training, technological requirements, and absent reporting processes.
7. 2017-2018 FNAC Meeting Dates and Times
The draft 2017-2018 FNAC Meeting Dates and Times were provided. The meeting locations will
follow the 2016-2017 schedule as follows:
Tuesday, September 19, 2017 (Chippewa)
Tuesday, October 17, 2017 (Oneida)
Tuesday, November 21, 2017 (Beal)
Tuesday, January 16, 2018 (Saunders)
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 (Lambeth)
Tuesday, March 20, 2018 (Delaware Central)
Tuesday, April 17, 2018 (B. Davison)
Tuesday, May 15, 2018 (SDCI)
Tuesday, June 19, 2018 (Munsee-Delaware)
All meetings will begin at 3:00 p.m.
8. LEARNING SUPPORT SERVICES UPDATE
a. FNMI Board Action Plan Update April 2017
C. Camillo and S. McGahey-Albert reported the Trustees will be visiting three First Nations
Communities next week with a report to follow. Student feedback from the First Nations Camp
was shared with a full report to be provided at a later date.
P. Skinner informed Principals that Cultural Funds are available as of 2017 April 1.
9. PRINCIPALS’ UPDATE
a. B. Davison Secondary School
Principal C. Friesen referred to the written report as attached (FNAC 1) and provided to the
committee in advance of the meeting.
b. Delaware Central Public School
Principal P. Spicer referred to the written report as attached (FNAC 2) and provided to the
committee in advance of the meeting.
c. H.B. Beal Secondary School
Principal M. Deeb referred to the written report provided electronically to committee membe rs
(FNAC 3).
d. Lambeth Public School
P. Skinner referred to the written report as attached (FNAC 4) and provided to the committee in
advance of the meeting.
e. Saunders Secondary School
B. White referred to the written report as attached (FNAC 5) as provided to the committee in
advance of the meeting.
f. Strathroy District Collegiate Institute - none
10. COMMUNITY UPDATE
a. Chippewas of the Thames First Nation
D. Grosbeck provided the Chippewas of the Thames First Nation update highlighting key
activities and events.
b. Munsee-Delaware Nation - none
c. Oneida Nation of the Thames
B. Summers referred to the written report as attached (FNAC 6) and provided to the committee in
advance of the meeting. Information regarding the AIAI Education Promising Practice Workshop
was sent to Elementary teachers and shared with the committee. If requested, registration and
accommodation costs can be covered.
Student advocate W. Deleary was introduced to the committee.
11. ADDITIONAL ITEMS
P. McKenzie distributed copies of the TVDSB system review of parent engagement involvement to
the committee with an electronic copy to be provided.
12. FUTURE MEETING DATES
All meetings start at 3:00 p.m.
13. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:18 p.m. by motion.
Recommendations: None
P. Schuyler
Committee Chair
Tuesday, 2017 May 16 Munsee-Delaware Nation, Healing Lodge
Tuesday, 2017 June 20 Strathroy District Collegiate Institute
Thames Valley District School Board Laura Elliott, Director of Education and Secretary
B. Davison Secondary School
785 Trafalgar Street, London, Ontario N5Z 1E6
Telephone: (519) 452-2880 Fax: (519) 452-2899
Web site: www.tvdsb.on.ca/davison
Chris Friesen, B.Sc., B.Ed., M.Ed., Principal ~ Melanie Seifert., B.A, B.Ed., M.Ed., Vice-Principal
Carrie Rogers, First Nations Counsellor
Report to First Nations Advisory Council
Date: Thursday, April 13, 2017
Transition Meetings and Timelines:
In addition to our Spring Sale on May 13th and Athletics Quest on May 19th, we are inviting all
of our Grade 8 families and students to our April 27th Parent/Teacher Night
We will take that opportunity to have the parents tour the school as well as introduce our
framework for Grade 9 next year as it will be significantly different than in past years
Initiatives to Support Students in their Learning:
We have successfully transitioned a few of our very senior students into the workplace via productive
intake meetings at our school with Employment Counsellors from a variety of local Employment
Centres
We are preparing for our May two-week Work Experience opportunity for our Grade 11, 12 and 12+’s
and we are adding in pre-WE workshops that will help with Customer Service/Soft Skills preparation
Our Grade 9 teachers continue to work on Project-Based Learning as part of our involvement with the
Board’s CODE project
Cultural Initiatives:
During our Grade 11/12 Work Experience in May, we will be doing Teepee teachings for the
Grade 9’s and 10’s in our school
We are having a guest come in to do native cooking with the Native Studies class
We are opening up the Native Studies classroom during Opening Exercises as an alternative
to being in the hallway
We are also working on our outdoor classroom that is adjacent to the FNMI Greenhouse
The students are planning a medicine garden as an example of Project-Based Learning
Important Dates:
Parent Teacher Night is April 27th
Spring Sale is May 13th
Grade 9 Orientation Activity is May 19th
Delaware Central Public School
14 Osborne Street, Delaware, Ontario, N0L 1E0
Telephone: (519) 652-5371 Fax: (519) 652-3578
Email: delawarecentral@tvdsb.on.ca
Website: www.tvdsb.ca/delawarecentral.cfm
Ms. P. Spicer
Principal
Mrs. G. Vangreuningen
Secretary
Report to First Nations Advisory Council
April 2017
TRANSITION MEETINGS and TIMELINES
A sixth transition meeting team has been scheduled for May 10.
Registrations for grade 7 continue to be welcomed.
Grade 8 to 9 transition meetings and school visits continue to be scheduled.
INITIATIVES TO SUPPORT STUDENTS IN THEIR LEARNING
Parents/guardians are encouraged to request a meeting with school staff any time questions
or concerns arise.
Program Development Team meetings continue on a monthly basis to address the academic,
physical, social and/or emotional needs of any student who is experiencing difficulty. Parents,
guardians, and student advocates are asked to attend. The next meeting is on May 2.
Erik Mandawe, Indigenous Liaison Admissions Coordinator at Western University and Amanda
Myers, Youth Outreach Coordinator, are meeting with students in grades 6, 7 and 8 on April
28.
Delaware staff have been invited to attend a parent-teacher dinner at the Munsee-Delaware
Community Centre
Grade 6 to 7 transition meeting is scheduled for May 17 for Delaware, Lambeth and Standing
Stone School Learning Support Teachers
CULTURAL INITIATIVES
Grade 6, 7 and 8 students attended the year-end celebration and pow wow at Fanshawe
College on March 23
Charlene Camillo and Starr McGahey-Albert facilitated the ‘Blanket Exercise’ for Delaware staff
and parents on April 3.
Students in K-8 will be participating in a Dance Workshop facilitated by Frazer Sundown and
Sandy Albert on April 21
Grade 6 students from Delaware and Lambeth will be visiting Standing Stone School on April
27 to participate in a social, crafts and a lacrosse game
An afterschool Spring Gathering is scheduled for May 3. Frazer Sundown and Lotunt Hoyunst
will be joining us.
Students in K-8 will be participating in a drumming workshop with Bill Hill on May 15
Students in K-8 will attend the Childrens’ Powwow at Chippewa of the Thames First Nation on
June 2
UPCOMING EVENTS
April 18-21 Spring Book Fair
April 21 Individual Education Plans go home
April 21 Dance Workshop
April 25 DCPA Dance Crew performs at the TVDSB Dance Festival
April 26 Grade 3 Swim to Survive Lessons begin (1st of 3)
April 27 Grade 6 visit to Standing Stone School
April 27 Thames Valley Neighbourhood Early Learning Program at DCPS (TVNELP)
April 28 Indigenous Services, Western University visit
May 1 Music Monday
May 2 Band to the TVDSB Arts Festival
May 3 Spring Gathering at Delaware Central School
May 15 Drumming with Bill Hill
June 2 Childrens’ Powwow at Chippewa of the Thames First Nation
June 21 National Aboriginal Day ~ Solidarity Day
THAMES VALLEY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
LAURA ELLIOTT, DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND SECRETARY
Report to First Nations Advisory Council
April 2017
TRANSITION MEETINGS AND TIMELINES
As we move into the Spring months we will be supporting those students who have registered for
Beal by way of visits and meetings with the transition team and Grade 9 Dean.
We will continue to hold tours and information sessions for Grade 8 students who may have an
interest in coming to Beal next year.
INITIATIVES TO SUPPORT STUDENTS IN THEIR LEARNING
Specialist High Skills Major students from Justice, Community Safety and Emergency Services,
Business, Information and Technology took part in a personality trait and inventory workshop at
Parkwood hospital. The students took part in interactive workshops in the morning on personality
traits, team building and trust building exercises. During the tour the students were introduced to
career and job opportunities in the Health Sector. This was one the numerous certifications and
reach ahead activities that the SHSM students take part in throughout the year. Any students in
Grades 11 and 12 who are interested in being part of this program should contact their Guidance
Counsellor.
CULTURAL INITIATIVES
Paint night for FMNI students in the Deloitte accounting mentorship program through the Martin
Family Initiative took place in late March.
ON-GOING INITIATVES
Beal's FNMI Committee meets every third Wednesday of the month in Room 314 to discuss
school wide initiatives dealing with FNMI education, awareness and opportunities for students
FNMI luncheon's are twice a month in the Wellness Room - provided by Oneida & COTTFN
Our peer mentor group has resumed for Semester two.
Smudging continues in the mornings for students and staff.
FUTURE DATES
April 20 School Council Meeting
April 27 Mid-Semester Reports Distributed
May 10-13 Beal Musical Theatre
H.B. Beal Secondary School
525 Dundas Street
London, Ontario
N6B 1W5
Phone: 519-452-2700
Fax: 519-452-2729
www.tvdsb.ca/beal.cfm
Email: beal@tvdsb.on.ca
Mr. Michael Deeb, B.L.S., H.B.A., M.A., Principal
Mr. Matthew Bradacs, B.A., B.Ed., M.Ed., Vice-Principal
Mr. Michael Barry, B.A., B.Comm., B.Ed., Vice-Principal
Ms. Tammy Vacante, B.A., B.Ed., M.A., Vice-Principal
Lambeth Public School
6820 Duffield St.
London, ON N6P 1A4
Phone: (519) 652-2050
Fax: (519) 652-1372
Lisa Williams Nicolle Valiquette
Principal Vice-Principal
Report to First Nations Advisory Council- April, 2017
Transition Meetings and Timelines:
Registrations for Grade 6-7 Standing Stone students continue to be
collected
Transition meeting on Wednesday, April 5 (Cultural Planning and
support for student transitions)
Initiatives to Support Students in their Learning
Resource Team planning and review meeting- use of technology
Program Planning meeting scheduled for grade 6 students transitioning
to Lambeth
Cultural Initiatives
Cultural Presentation/Story telling with Bill Hill- March 31, 2017
History of Oneida Community/Building a partnership-
Star-McGahey-Albert at Lambeth School Council Meeting-Wednesday,
April 5, 2017
Blanket Exercise Presentation for Lambeth Community-
May 2, 2017
Spring Social for Intermediate Students- June 12, 2017
Upcoming Events
Lambeth Public School Numeracy Night- April 25, 2017
Primary Concert- April 12, 2017
Grade 8 Graduation Parent Meeting- April 18, 2017
REPORT to FIRST NATIONS ADVISORY COUNCIL
Saunders Secondary School
April 18th, 2017
TRANSITION MEETINGS AND TIME LINES
FNMI Bridging Groups
Our attendance counsellors, Student Success Teachers and Teacher Champions are busy preparing for the FNMI Bridging
Group sessions. These sessions are designed to help our incoming Gr. 9 FNMI students make a successful transition into
Saunders.
INITIATIVES TO SUPPORT STUDENTS IN THEIR LEARNING
OSSLT Preparation
The combined effort of the FNMI communities and Saunders to encourage the students to complete the OSSLT was
successful.
FNSST Meeting
Following the release of the mid-term report cards on May 2nd, a FNSST meeting will be scheduled to review the
progress of students and develop appropriate action plans to support students in need.
CULTURAL INITIATIVES
Onondaga Farms in St. George Ontario
Cassie Tamminga and Steve Merklinger took 24 students to camp on April 11th, 2017 for 3 days.
Buddy Benches
We are planning to make Buddy Benches for Standing Stone and Antler River with our construction teacher , Steve
Merklinger.
Fanshawe Pow Wow
87 Saunders students attended the Fanshawe Pow Wow. This was a great opportunity for growth in cultural competency
for many of our students across all cultural backgrounds.
Martin Family Initiative
Our next KPMG meeting is at Western Indigenous services with a tour and panel group on April 20th, 2017.
IMPORTANT DATES:
April 18th, 2017 - Launch of Saunders Cancer Campaign
April 20th, 2017 - Term 2 Begins
May 2nd, 2017 - Report Cards Go Home
ASSOCIATION OF IROQUOIS & ALLIED INDIANS
EDUCATION PROMISING PRACTICES GATHERING
387 PRINCESS AVE. LONDON, ONTARIO, N6B 2A7
Telephone: (519) 434-2761 Fax: (519) 675-1053
MEMO
MEETING PURPOSE:
The purpose of this two day Promising Practices Professional Development Gathering is for First Nations and
Provincial teaching and support staff to come together to learn skills based on First Nations best and promising
mental wellness practices to support First Nations students’ within the school environment.
Each member Nation can send four participants to attend the upcoming AIAI Education Promising Practices
Workshop. Suggestions on interested participants to attend can be:
Education Directors
Education Student Support Technicians
Education Counsellors
Teachers – Provincial and/or First Nation
AIAI EDUCATION PROMISING PRACTICES WORKSHOP
MAY 16 & 17, 2017
9:00 A.M. - 4:30 P.M.
ONEIDA OF THE THAMES FIRST NATION
COMMUNITY CENTRE – BEAR’S DEN
2017 BALLPARK ROAD, SOUTHWOLD, ONTARIO N0L 2G0
PLEASE BE ADVISED:
Accommodations will be direct-billed to AIAI. Each participant are required to complete the attached registration form
and to forward to AIAI.
Following the meeting, AIAI will reimburse the sending organization at the AIAI rates for mileage, breakfast and dinner
meal expenses as applicable, as well as, any supply release costs required to attend. Lunch and A.M. & P.M. snacks will
be provided during the meeting.
Please forward registration forms to the attention of Shayna Phillips at sphillips@aiai.on.ca
REGISTRATION DEADLINE & TO SECURE ACCOMMDATIONS IS MONDAY, APRIL 24, 2017 @4:00PM
Please fax to AIAI at (519) 675-1053 ATTN: Shayna Phillips, 387 Princess Ave., London, ON N6B 2A7 and/or email:
sphillips@aiai.on.ca
For any additional information on the gathering, please contact Gina McGahey, Education Policy Advisor at (519)434-
2761 and/or gmcgahey@aiai.on.ca
Agenda for the meeting will follow.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND PRIORITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
2017 April 18
6:00 p.m. – 8:29 p.m.
Members: Trustees J. Bennett, R. Campbell, C. Goodall, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, A. Morell, S. Polhill, M. Reid,
P. Schuyler, J. Skinner, R. Tisdale, J. Todd, Student Trustees A. Pucchio (+6:13 -8:25), S. Suvajac
(+6:13,-8:25)
Regrets: B. McKinnon, G. Hart
Administration: C. Beal (Superintendent, -8:25), L. Elliott (Director), J. Pratt (Associate Director), V.
Nielsen (Associate Director,-8:25), R. Culhane (Superintendent,+6:25,-8:25), S. Builder (Superintendent, -
8:25), M. Moynihan (Superintendent,-8:25), K. Wilkinson (Superintendent,-8:25), S. Macey (Manager, -
8:25), D. Munroe (Supervisor, -8:25), E. Ng (Financial Analyst,-8:25), M. Verhey-Korpan (Acting Staffing
Officer, -7:15), B. Williams (Supervisor)
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – The agenda, as amended, was approved on motion.
2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared
3. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING – provided for information.
4. BUSINESS ARISING – none.
5. BUDGET DISCUSSION
a. GSN OVERVIEW
C. Beal and S. Macey provided an overview of the Grants for Student Needs (GSNs) funding
from the Ministry of Education. The presentation included a description of major sources of
funding for school boards; a description of how enrolment drives the GSN funding; a description
of key grants and capital funding; Education Programs Other (EPOs); and current budget
pressures and challenges. Questions of clarification regarding grant allocations were addressed.
b. 2017-2018 GSN AND EPO ANNOUNCEMENT
C. Beal presented highlights of the 2017-2018 Grants for Student Needs (GSN) announcement
as per Ministry of Education Memorandum 2017:B4. Questions of clarification regarding the
provincial funding in the GSN announcement were addressed by administration.
S. Macey presented highlights of the 2017-2018 Education Programs – Other Funding (EPOs) as
per Ministry of Education Memorandum 2017:B3. EPO grant amounts confirmed will be included
in the budget. EPO grant allocations to be confirmed at a later date will not be included in the
budget at this time. Questions of clarification regarding EPOs not yet confirmed were addressed
by administration. There was a request for information on whether the EPO grants will fully cover
salary increases in 2017-2018.
The full B Memorandum is available on the Ministry of Education website at:
https://efis.fma.csc.gov.on.ca/faab/
C. Beal advised detailed grant calculations will be completed once the EFIS (Education Finance
Information System ) estimates are released to the board. EFIS estimates are to be released by
2017 April 21.
c. PROJECTED 2017-2018 ENROLMENT
D. Munroe presented for information the 2017-2018 project enrolment for Elementary and
Secondary comparing those figures to the 2016-2017 revised estimates.
2017 April 18…. 2
d. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY STAFFING
S. Macey presented for information the 2017-2018 preliminary Elementary and Secondary
staffing numbers. The calculations used to determine staffing were described. Questions of
clarification regarding staffing were addressed by administration.
e. PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS
S. Macey advised the budget website page is now posted for 2017-2018 including a link to allow
individuals to provide written public input. Written input received will be brought forward to the
committee for their review. The deadline for receipt of written input is 2017 June 6.
6. SENIOR ADMINISTRATION BUDGET INITIATIVES
Two new senior administrative budget initiatives were reviewed.
P. McKenzie presented for consideration the addition of .33 FTE increase to support additional
course offerings in secondary native languages. The rationale for the request was described noting
the increasing interest in native language courses.
In response to a question it was clarified that fee-paying students do not generate GSN funding to
cover the cost of delivering secondary native language courses.
M. Reid advised, as per Board motion, a letter has been written to the Ministry of Education
requesting that the class size required to offer Native Language be reduced from 12 to 5 students.
K. Wilkinson presented for consideration a two-year pilot project to develop courses of study and
resource materials to support learners enrolled in Adult, Alternative and Continuing Education
courses leading to the OSSD. The rationale for the request was described.
Questions of clarification regarding the current courses of study and use of resource materials were
responded to by K. Wilkinson. K Wilkinson advised on the collaborative work of a number of boards
in southwestern Ontario regarding AACE programming.
7. TRUSTEE BUDGET INITIATIVES
Three new trustee budget initiatives were reviewed.
J. Skinner presented for consideration a proposed initiative for the placement of automated external
defibrillators in all TVDSB schools. Questions of clarification were addressed by J. Skinner. The
maintenance of current AEDs was described. L. Elliott noted the draft policy on AEDs has been
posted for public input. Discussion centred on potential alternative sources of funding for AEDs
noting Ministry of Education funding is i ntended for educating students. Trustees provided J. Skinner
with a number of questions they would ask should he bring the initiative forward for consideration
during the budget approval process.
J. Skinner presented for consideration a proposed initiative to equip elementary classrooms with
STEAM tools. The rationale for the initiative was described. It was noted the funding would support
the purchase of equipment that schools may not otherwise have in their kit. In response to a
question, M. Moynihan advised on the recent purchase of equipment and the professional learning
provided to teachers related to their use of the tools purchased.
J. Skinner presented for consideration the equipment of schools with sensory rooms. The initiative
was presented as a one-year pilot project. R. Culhane advised sensory rooms are used by students
with presenting needs. Rooms are equipped as needed to meet individual student needs. Schools
identifying a need for a sensory room may set that as a budget priority for the school. It was
suggested that information regarding the current number and usage of sensory rooms in the system
and the cost to implement a sensory room be available to trustees shoul d they require that
information during the budget deliberation process.
2017 April 18…. 2
Next steps regarding senior administrative and trustee budget initiatives were discussed. It was
agreed that those initiatives previously approved by trustees or those initiatives funded through the
GSN or Collective Agreement Extensions funding would be included in the budget as expenses.
Discussion centred on the process for vetting the remaining initiatives. J. Pratt advised draft budget
expenses would be coming forward to trustees at the Planning and Priorities meeting 2017 May 16
providing an opportunity to discuss what initiatives could be built into the budget. Otherwise,
initiatives would be considered during the 2017 June 20 budget debate.
As a point of clarification it was noted the initiatives presented at the meeting were new; prev iously
presented initiatives were still on the table for consideration during budget deliberations.
8. OTHER BUSINESS - none
9. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS BY MEMBERS
C. Goodall reflected on the value of information provided during the meeting and the discussion held
regarding the budget.
10. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 6:00 p.m.
11. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS – none
On motion, the committee recessed at 8:22 p.m. reconvening at 8:25 p.m.
12. IN CAMERA
On motion the committee moved in camera at 8:25 p.m. reconvening in public session at 8:29 p.m.
13. ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the committee adjourned at 8:29 p.m.
RECOMMENDATIONS: None
J. TODD
Committee Chair
REPORT OF THE CHAIR’S COMMITTEE
2017 April 25
12:42 p.m. – 1:20 p.m.
MEMBERS
J. Bennett M. Reid (Chair)
R. Tisdale
Regrets: J. Todd, A. Morell
ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS
L. Elliott
B. Williams
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved by motion.
2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared
3. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE UPCOMING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDAS
Agendas for the 2017 May 9 and 16 Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee agenda were
reviewed.
4. CORRESPONDENCE
A letter from the Middlesex-London Health Unit to Chair M. Reid regarding the process of consent
used by TVDSB for dental screening was recei ved and discussed. The letter of correspondence is to
be included for information on the 2017 May 23 Board meeting agenda.
A copy of an email sent to Director Elliott and Chair Reid congratulating their leadership in the raising
of the Pride and Trans flags at the Board office was received. A copy of the email will be forwarded
to trustees for information.
Correspondence received from the Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula regarding Automated
External Defibrillators was received and will be included for information on the 2017 May 23 Board
meeting agenda.
5. REVIEW OF PUBLIC INPUT SCHEDULE FOR PARS
The list of applicants requesting delegation at the May 2 Board meeting regarding the Pupil
Accommodation Reviews was reviewed. Given the significant number of applications, it was
determined to schedule a Board meeting on May 3 to receive delegates.
6. PUBLIC INPUT TO BUDGET PROCESS
Referred to the 2017 May 9 meeting of the Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee.
7. SCHEDULING OF SMUDGING
It was determined a smudging ceremony will be held on either June 20 or June 27.
8. CONFIRMATION OF VOTING DELEGATES FOR THE ONTARIO PUBLIC SCHOOL BOARDS’
ASSOCIATION (OPSBA) AGM
Voting delegates for the OPSBA AGM were confirmed. The following motions were moved and
carried:
That Trustee R. Tisdale be appointed as the voting delegate at the OPSBA Annual General
Meeting.
That Trustee M. Reid be appointed as the alternate voting delegate at the OPSBA Annual
General Meeting.
9. RURAL ENGAGEMENT SESSIONS
L. Elliott shared information regarding the Ministry consultation process taking place in small rural
communities from May 5 to 26. The closest location where the consultation is taking place is in
Thedford on May 24. Information will be sent to trustees for their information.
10. UPCOMING EVENTS AND INITIATIVES
OPSBA AGM - 2017 June 8-11
Trustee/MPP Meeting – 2017 June 16
11. OTHER BUSINESS
a. Board Meeting Schedule
It was noted the Naming Committee Report for the new NW Elementary School will be brought
forward to a Board meeting in early May.
A Committee of the Whole, In-Camera meeting was called for 2017 June 20 at 5:30 p.m. If the
smudging ceremony can be scheduled that evening the start time for the Special Meeting of the
Board will be 7:30 p.m.
12. FUTURE CHAIR’S COMMITTEE MEETING DATES
The meeting dates for the Chair’s Committee were confirmed for the period up to 2017 June 30 as
follows:
May 16, 2017 12 p.m. May 30, 2017 3 p.m. June 20, 2017 12 p.m.
13. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING
The next Chair’s Committee meeting was confirmed for 2017 May 16, 12 p.m.
14. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 1:20 p.m. by motion.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That Trustee R. Tisdale be appointed as the voting delegate at the OPSBA Annual General
Meeting.
That Trustee M. Reid be appointed as the alternate voting delegate at the OPSBA Annual
General Meeting.
MATT REID
Chairperson
REPORT OF THE SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
2017 May 1
6:30 p.m. to 9:25 p.m.
MEMBERS ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS
M. Barbeau, Voice for Hearing Impaired Children
J. Bennett, Trustee
M. Cvetkovich, Children’s Aid Society of London and Middlesex
C. Dendias, Chippewas of the Thames
C. Goodall, Trustee
T. Grant, Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Network-ELMO
J. Gritzan, Thames Valley Children’s Centre (-8:15)
B. Harvey, Epilepsy Support Centre
A. Morse, Easter Seals
J. Nuyens, Thames Valley Council of Home & School Associations
(+6:58)
J. Schaeffer, VIEWS for Visually Impaired
J. Simpson, Children’s Aid Society of London and Middlesex
L. Turner-Otte, Ontario Parents Advocating for Children with Cancer
(-9:00)
S. Walker, Vanier Children’s Services
S. Weis, Association for Bright Children (-9:10)
S. Young, Autism Ontario
Regrets:
D. Clark, Secondary Principal
P. Cook, Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario
R. Tisdale, Trustee
S. Wilson, Community Living London (leave)
S. Builder , Superintendent of Special Education
A. Leatham, Learning Supervisor
M. Chevalier, Elementary Principal
R. Lee, Elementary Principal (-9:15)
T. Birtch, Secondary Principal
B. Williams , Corporate Services
K. Edgar, Superintendent (-7:11)
C. Beal, Superintendent (+7:11, -7:47)
S. Macey, Manager (+7:11, -7:47)
P. Hearse, Supervisor (+7:11, -7:47)
J. Knight, Manager (+7:11, -7:47)
Guests:
B. Mai, Association for Bright Children
(-6:58, +7:11, -9:00)
1. CALL TO ORDER
S. Builder called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. at the Education Centre. In the absence of the
Chair and Vice Chair, J. Bennett was nominated to preside as Chair.
2. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved on motion and carried.
M. Cvetkovich introduced J. Simpson to the meeting noting she is the alternate representative for the
Children’s Aid Society of London and Middlesex.
3. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none
4. MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS FROM 2017 April 4 – provided for information
5. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES OF 2017 April 4
a. Pro Grant Discussion (item #5.a)
Discussion considered the intent of the Pro Grant application. S. Builder advised the Special
Education Department was planning a weekend conference next year and suggested the Pro
Grant could support an event the evening before the conference for parents. Considering the
department also was supporting the LDA conference, it was felt the department could n ot
organize a third stand-alone event.
Given the focus of the proposed conference is not specifically for parents and the need for
member participation to organize an event, it was determined a Pro Grant application would not
be submitted this year.
2017 May 1…2
b. SEAC Handbook (item # 5.b)
A. Morse advised the SEAC Handbook and Standard 17 will be coming forward to the 2017 May
30 meeting for final review.
Members were asked for their feedback as to whether the handbook provides a helpful resource,
especially for new members. Discussion considered whether to include the representatives of the
member organizations in the handbook.
c. IOWA Questions (item #7)
As a follow up to the previous meeting, A. Leatham reported the IOWA tool is used to determine
whether full grade acceleration would be in the best interest of the student. Statistics regarding
the number of students that have been assessed and accelerated using the IOWA tool were
provided. A. Leatham described the tool and the assessment process. Questions of clarification
were addressed by A. Leatham.
The development of an acceleration guide for staff is in process and will be in place for next year.
It was noted the messaging parents often receive is that the board does not accelerate students.
It was suggested that principals be made aware of the practices in this regard. Early identification
of gifted students was discussed.
6. IN-CAMERA
On motion, the committee moved in-camera at 6:58 p.m., reconvening in public session at 7:11 p.m.
7. BUDGET PRESENTATION
S. Builder welcomed and introduced from Financial Services C. Beal, S. Macey, J. Knight, and P.
Hearse.
The 2017-2018 preliminary Special Education budget was reviewed. Revenues and proposed
expenses were outlined. Changes in revenues and expenses relative to the 2016-2017 approved
budget were highlighted.
The increased staffing expenses related to additional staffing, and increases in salaries and benefits
was described. Further detail on the enveloped grants was provided. It was noted the mental health
allocation may need to be adjusted to the previous year’s amount. S. Builder spoke to the increases
in the staffing in the Special Education Department.
Questions of clarification regarding the board mileage rate and the budget initiative to address
bussing for gifted students were addressed by Administration.
In consideration of the budget preparation process and scheduling of SEAC meetings, it was agreed
to reschedule the May 7, 2018 meeting to May 14, 2018 next year.
Members asked that the revised 2017-2018 Special Education budget return to the 2017 May 30
meeting for final review.
8. EXCEPTIONALITY DATA AND TRENDS
S. Builder distributed a report on the exceptionality data by grade and by gender for students on an
Individual Education Plan (IEP). The increase in the number of students on an IEP overall and those
by exceptionality were highlighted. In response to a question, it was noted a child with multiple
exceptionalities is recorded based on the primary exceptionality. S. Builder offered to bring data
regarding multiple exceptionalities when exceptionality data is next reported.
Discussion centred on the delivery of Special Education services to students not on an IEP or to
students who have not been identified through an Identification, Placement, and Review Committee
(IPRC) and the work of the department to capture those statistics through the case management
system. S. Builder offered to present information to the committee at the June meeting.
2017 May 1…3
Budget implications were discussed noting there is little consistency across the province in how
numbers are being reported to the Ministry.
The consistent ratio of male to female students recorded on the data sheets provided was observed
across exceptionalities. The overall enrollment of male to female students will be provided.
9. SPECIAL EDUCATION MISSION AND VISION
A. Leatham shared the mission, vision, and foundation principles of the Special Education
Department. A. Leatham noted the goals for the department align with the Board Improvement Plan
and comply with the Special Education audit recently completed. The foundation principles will be
reflected in Standard 2 of the Special Education Plan.
A. Leatham distributed a resource being developed to illustrate the tiered approach service model
used by the department. Suggested edits to the draft document were captured by A. Leatham and S.
Builder. Members were invited to send further feedback to S. Builder. It was noted many
interventions provided through Special Education were not included on the document noting it would
be important to indicate it is not an inclusive list.
10. SEAC REPRESENTATION
a. IEP AUDIT
S. Walker and A. Morse volunteered to participate as the SEAC representatives in the IEP audit
scheduled for 2017 May 16.
b. PASSAGES
M. Barbeau volunteered to participate as the SEAC representative on the Passages planning
committee.
11. DRAFT DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING PROGRAM GUIDE
A. Leatham distributed for information and feedback versions of the draft Special Education Program
Guide. The resource is intended to support teachers of self-contained classes. Feedback was
provided and captured by S. Builder. There was suggestion there be electronic copies.
A. Leatham and S. Builder shared information on a proposed streamlined application process for
specialized programs, including self-contained classroom. The draft application form for the deaf and
hard of hearing self-contained class was distributed. Feedback was captured by S. Builder.
The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the meeting be extended until 9:30 p.m.
12. DRAFT EXCEPTIONALITIY CRITERIA FOR VISION
A. Leatham described the changes to the exceptionality criteria for vision in Standard 8 and the
rationale for the changes noting the recommendations of the Vision Team, a review of standards
across boards, and consultation with an ophthalmologist. The changes were discussed and
supported.
13. SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE PRIORITIES (STANDING ITEM)
S. Builder shared the current priorities are focused on reviewing the handbook and the Special
Education survey results. The handbook was discussed earlier in the meeting and an overview of the
survey results will be shared in the Special Education Standard 1 and then in further detail in
September.
14. SPECIAL NEEDS STRATEGY UPDATE (STANDING ITEM)
A. Morse reported SEAC will be asked to provide feedback on the proposal anticipating that 45
minutes will be needed on the June SEAC agenda.
2017 May 1…4
15. SPECIAL EDUCATION PLAN (STANDING ITEM)
Standards 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, and 15 of the Special Education Plan were provided in advance of the
meeting.
S. Builder advised Standard 4 as presented will not require further changes as the inclusion of the
Program Development Team meeting information is a requirement of the Standard.
A. Leatham advised additional revisions are recommended to Standard 9 at it pertains to the criteria
for placement in a transition program class. The suggested edit regarding the requirement for
residential treatment was discussed; there was support to change the requirement to residential
treatment and/or treatment.
In response to a comment regarding the current placement options, S. Builder advised this is being
reviewed and while changes are not possible for this year, it has been identified as a priority for next
year.
16. MODIFIED DAY GUIDELINES (STANDING ITEM)
S. Builder provided statistics on the number of elementary students on a modified day today (21). In
response a question regarding a review of the process S. Builder advised the committee still has work
to do and may consider an extension of the guidelines to secondary.
17. CORRESPONDENCE (STANDING ITEM) - none
18. OTHER BUSINESS - none
19. FORUM: ASSOCIATION UPDATES
T. Grant shared news that there was 26 M in health funding announced in the recent provincial
budget for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.
20. MEETING DATES
2016-2017 Meeting Dates – London Room
Tuesday, May 30 12:15pm (Dundas Room)
Monday, June 5 6:30pm
21. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
IPRC Waivers
Special Education Classroom Placements
Mental Health Literacy Kits (Fall)
Exceptionality Data & Trends (December & May)
IEP Report Summary (May)
Informal Suspension (ongoing)
Creating a Survey for Gifted Program (D. Ensing)
Mental Health Supports/Community Update (K. Edgar, Oct.)
SAL
Modified Day Updates
Behaviour Review Status/Meetings/Membership (Oct.)
Mission/Vision for BIPSA (Oct.)
22. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m. by motion.
JOYCE BENNETT
CHAIRPERSON
RECOMMENDATIONS: None
REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE
2017 May 9
3:37 p.m. - 4:32 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
M. Laprise M. King
M. Reid (+3:55) R. Tisdale (Chair)
Regrets: A. Morell
ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS
C. Beal
J. Pratt
J. Knight
S. Bedi (-4:13)
L. Elliott (-4:27)
B. Williams
S. Macey
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved by motion.
2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST - none declared
3. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING – 2017 April 11 – provided for information.
4. IN CAMERA
On motion, the committee moved in camera at 3:51 p.m. reconvening in public session at 4:19 p.m.
5. AUDIT COMMITTEE SELF-ASSESSMENT
C. Beal presented the revised Audit Committee Self-Assessment Tool. The proposed changes
were accepted; the revised form will be used in the future.
6. MINISTRY OF EDUCATION FINANCIAL RISK ASSESSMENTS
C. Beal presented the Ministry of Education Financial Risk Assessments power point slide deck.
Background information on the definition, process, cycle (how often), parameters and historical
results of operating risk assessments and capital risk assessments performed by the Ministry were
outlined. It was noted the risk assessment provides comparative results across Boards.
The Ministry’s assessment of the Thames Valley District School Board’s operating risk in 2015/16
and capital risk in 2014/15 was provided noting the board was assessed as a low risk for operating
purposes and at a medium risk for the board’s capital positi on. It was suggested the Board’s
capital risk in the current year will be reassessed as low.
7. ADDITIONAL ITEMS - none
8. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting was scheduled for 2017 June 13.
9. ADJOURNMENT
A motion to adjourn was approved at 4:32 p.m.
RECOMMENDATIONS: None
RUTH TISDALE
Chairperson
REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND PRIORITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
2017 May 9
6:02 p.m. – 8:54 p.m.
Members: Trustees J. Bennett, R. Campbell, C. Goodall, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, B. McKinnon (by phone), A.
Morell, S. Polhill, M. Reid, P. Schuyler, J. Skinner, R. Tisdale, J. Todd; Student Trustee S. Suvajac (+6:12
p.m., -8:21 p.m.)
Regrets: Student Trustee A. Pucchio
Administration: C. Beal (Superintendent, -7:00 p.m.), K. Bushell (Executive Officer, -8:21 p.m.), L. Elliott
(Director, +6:19), J. Pratt (Associate Director), V. Nielsen (Associate Director), S. Builder
(Superintendent), H. Gerrits (Manager, -8:21 p.m.), D. Macpherson (Superintendent), K. Edgar
(Superintendent), M. Moynihan (Superintendent), S. Powell (Superintendent , -8:21 p.m.), P. McKenzie
(Superintendent), L. Munro (Learning Supervisor, -8:21 p.m.), K. Wilkinson (Superintendent), B. Williams
(Supervisor), S. Macey (Manager, -7:00 p.m.), E. Ng (Financial Analyst, -7:00 p.m.), J Knight (Manager, -
7:00 p.m.)
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – The agenda, as amended, was approved on motion.
2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared.
3. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING - provided for information.
4. BUSINESS ARISING
In relation to item #7 of the 2017 April 18 meeting, Trustee P. Jaffe suggested the AED budget
initiative be referred to administration for the purposes of developing a plan for identifying community
partners to cover the cost of installing AEDs in all schools.
There was general support to ask administration for a report regarding the installation of AEDs in all
schools utilizing community funding to support the initiative. There was a request the report include
information regarding any potential liability to the board as it relates to having AEDs in TVDSB
schools.
On the recommendation of the committee, a formal motion will arise out of the current report when it
is presented at the 2017 May 23 Board meeting.
It further was noted the budget initiative pertaining to sensory rooms was withdrawn and
communicated to Administration.
5. TECHNOLOGY IN SUPPORT OF RETHINK SECONDARY
As a follow up to communication to trustees from Superintendent M. Moynihan regarding the
selection of schools to participate in the Technology in Support of Rethink Secondary init iative,
trustees were invited to ask questions. There were no questions.
6. WATER TESTING, FLUSHING AND FOUNTAIN REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
K. Bushell presented for information a verbal report on the revised Water Testing, Flushing and Water
Fountain Replacement Program. Revisions to O. Reg. 243/07 regarding lead sampling were
described. A proposed plan to test, flush, and/or replace taps/fountains, as appropriate and in
keeping with the new legislation, was outlined. It was noted the program will start in the elementary
panel this year. Questions of clarification regarding the funding and process for dealing with any
failed taps/fountains were addressed by K. Bushell.
7. BUDGET DISCUSSION
a. 2017-2018 PRELIMINARY BUDGET – GRANTS FOR STUDENT NEEDS (GSN)
C. Beal introduced the 2017-2018 preliminary budget – GSN advising the 1.5% increase in
salaries/benefits and other investments negotiated in the collective agreements have been
2017 May 9…. 2
included in the Ministry’s grant allocations. S. Macey reviewed the 2017-18 Preliminary Budget –
GSN; year over year estimates were outlined for student enrolment and grant allocations for
operating purposes.
b. RESTRICTED GRANTS
The preliminary 2017-2018 budget for restricted grants was reviewed and compared to the
amounts estimated for 2016-2017. Included in the information were allocated amounts to
Education Programs Other (EPOs) and to Restricted Grants provided in the GSN. Changes in
EPO funding relative to the previous year and those not yet received were highlighted.
Clarification on the EPO for the Specialist High Skills Major was provided noting it is the holdback
portion on the Restricted Grant amount. The rationale for including the holdback as an EPO was
provided.
In response to a question, it was noted the restricted grants are determined by the Ministry.
c. COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT – INVESTMENTS
C. Beal presented information on the new staff hired through the Collective Agreement
Extensions and funded through the Ministry of Education Local Priorities Fund. Positions yet to
be announced were noted; discussions in process with a number of the union groups were
described.
d. SPECIAL EDUCATION PROJECTED 2017-2018 REVENUE AND BUDGET
S. Macey presented the preliminary 2017-2018 grant and budget allocations for Special
Education; information included comparators to the approved budget amounts for 2016-2017. It
was noted the draft grants and budget was presented to the Special Education Advisory
Committee at their 2017 May 1 meeting.
The budgeted expenses were reviewed. The increases in staffing in Special Education resultant
to the collective agreements and grant increases were highlighted.
e. PUBLIC INPUT/PUBLIC DELEGATION
C. Beal reviewed the written public input received through the website to date. Administration
responded to questions of clarification regarding the input received.
C. Beal confirmed public delegations will be received at the 2017 June 13 Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee meeting.
8. EPAR QUESTIONS FOR TRUSTEES
Committee Chair J. Todd advised the committee that trustees had submitted a number of questions
regarding the EPAR recommendations. K. Bushell and Administration responded to questions of
clarification regarding preferred OTGs, the timelines and process for submitting a business case,
potential impact of the EPAR decisions on the business case, collaboration opportunities, the
rationale for the administrative recommendations, transportation, programming, attendance area
adjustments, history of board decisions regarding school closures, the number of new schools built,
the possible location of a future French Immersion school in Elgin County, future development
accounted for in the recommendations, and rationale for the size of the geographical area considered
under EPAR 02.
9. IN-CAMERA
On motion the committee moved in camera at 8:21 p.m., reconvening in public session at 8:54 p.m.
10. OTHER BUSINESS - none
11. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS BY MEMBERS - none
2017 May 9…. 2
12. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:00 p.m.
13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - none
14. ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the committee adjourned at 8:54 p.m.
RECOMMENDATIONS: None
J. TODD
Committee Chair
REPORT OF THE CHAIR’S COMMITTEE
2017 May 16
12:47 p.m. – 1:25 p.m.
MEMBERS
J. Bennett A Morell
M. Reid (Chair) J. Todd
Regrets: R. Tisdale
ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS
L. Elliott
B. Williams
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved by motion.
2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared
3. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE 2017 MAY 23 BOARD MEETING AGENDAS
The 2017 May 23 in-camera and public Board meeting agendas were reviewed and discussed.
4. CORRESPONDENCE
A letter from the Office of the Prime Minister acknowledging receipt of the letter sent by TVDSB
concerning funding for First Nations’ schools was received. It is to be included under
Correspondence on the 2017 May 23 Board meeting agenda.
A copy of a letter sent to the Deputy Minister of Education from Hastings and Prince Edward District
School Board regarding EQAO testing was received and will be sent out to trustees for their
information.
5. BYLAW AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
The committee reviewed the list of trustees indicating their interest in sitting on the Bylaw Ad Hoc
Committee.
The following motion was moved and carried:
That Trustees J. Bennett, R. Tisdale, and M. Reid be appointed to sit on the Bylaw Ad Hoc
Committee.
6. ANNUAL COMMUNITY PLANNING AND FACILITY COLLABORATION OPPORTUNITIES
MEETINGS
The following trustees were confirmed to Chair the Annual Community Planning and Facility
Collaboration meetings:
City of London, June 14, 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. – Trustee Reid
Elgin County, June 15, 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. – Trustee Todd
Oxford County, June 15, 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. – Trustee Hart
Middlesex County, June 22, 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. – Trustee Morell
7. RURAL AND REMOTE EDUCATION REVIEW – CONSULTATION KEY MESSAGES
Communication from OPSBA regarding the consultation key messages of the Rural and Remote
Education Review was received. Administrative and Trustee representation at the session was
discussed.
8. APPROVAL PROCESS FOR COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, IN-CAMERA REPORTS
As a follow up to the 2017 February 21 Chair’s meeting, B. Williams reported on research completed
regarding the suggestion there be an approval process for the minutes of the Committee of the
Whole, in-camera reports. Corporate Services will establish the process effective September 2017.
9. STUDENT TRUSTEE DEBATE AND ELECTION – CANDIDATES
M. Reid advised the student trustee debate and election is scheduled for 2017 May 18; an information
session with the candidates is scheduled for 2017 May 16. The tenure of student trustee was
discussed.
10. CSBA CONGRESS 2017
Trustee participation at the CSBA Congress was discussed noting J. Bennett is attending. The
opportunity for a second trustee to attend was considered; trustees will be invited to submit an
application for review and approval by the Chair’s Committee.
11. UPCOMING EVENTS AND INITIATIVES
OPSBA AGM - 2017 June 8-11
Trustee/MPP Meeting – 2017 June 16
Annual Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Opportunities Meetings (see item #6)
12. OTHER BUSINESS - none
13. FUTURE CHAIR’S COMMITTEE MEETING DATES
The meeting dates for the Chair’s Committee were confirmed as follows:
May 30, 2017 3:00 p.m. June 20, 2017 12:00 p.m.
14. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING
The next Chair’s Committee meeting was confirmed for 2017 May 30, 3:00 p.m.
15. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 1:25 p.m. by motion.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That Trustees J. Bennett, R. Tisdale, and M. Reid be appointed to set on the Bylaw Ad Hoc
Committee.
MATT REID
Chairperson
REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND PRIORITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
2017 May 16
6:14 p.m. – 7:53 p.m.
Members: Trustees R. Campbell, C. Goodall, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, B. McKinnon, A. Morell, M. Reid, J.
Skinner, Student Trustees A. Pucchio and S. Suvajac
Regrets: Trustees J. Bennett, S. Polhill, P. Schuyler, R. Tisdale, and J. Todd
Administration: C. Beal (Superintendent), K. Bushell (Executive Officer), L. Elliott (Director), J. Pratt
(Associate Director), V. Nielsen (Associate Director), S. Builder (Superintendent), D. Macpherson
(Superintendent), K. Edgar (Superintendent), S. Powell (Superintendent), L. Griffith-Jones
(Superintendent), K. Wilkinson (Superintendent), S. Macey (Manager), E. Ng (Financial Analyst), J.
Knight (Manager), D. Munroe (Supervisor), B. Williams (Supervisor).
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – The agenda was approved on motion.
2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared
3. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING – provided for information
4. BUISNESS ARISING – none
5. BUDGET DISCUSSION
C. Beal introduced the Finance team of S. Macey, J. Knight, D. Munroe, and E. Ng.
a. GSN GRANT REPORTS
The projected grant allocations for Board Administration and Governance, School Foundation,
School Operations, and Special Education for 2017-18 relative to the 2016-17 estimates were
presented and reviewed. Changes to the grant allocations were highlighted noting 2017-2018
represents the final year of the transition to the new allocation models.
b. BUDGET INITIATIVES
A revised summary list of Senior Administrative budget initiatives to be included in the 2017-2018
preliminary budget was distributed. The list included initiatives funded by the Collective
Agreements and GSN/Ministry funding, those previously approved, and those items deemed to
be crucial.
S. Builder addressed the proposed increase to the Special Education budget to meet an
emergent need. Questions of clarification regarding Ministry funding were addressed by S.
Builder and C. Beal. A report will be coming forward to Trustees at their 2017 May 23 meeting
requesting approval of these Special Education expenses in advance of the budget process.
The summary list of budget initiatives, submitted by Senior Administration and Trustees, for
decision as to whether to include them in the 2017-2018 budget were reviewed and discussed.
Administration was asked to include the Robotics initiative on the list of Trustee initiatives.
Discussion centred on the Trustee initiative to hire in -house legal counsel and the potential role a
generalist lawyer would have in the organization. J. Pratt and L. Elliott described the pros and
cons of having in-house legal counsel. J. Pratt spoke to the options that would need to be
considered if the pilot initiative was approved by Trustees. At the request of P. Jaffe, J. Pratt was
asked to bring forward a report on legal costs.
2017 May 16…. 2
c. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR AEDS
L. Griffith-Jones presented for feedback an implementation plan for the installation of AEDs in all
schools over a 3-5 year period. The report is attached (Planning-1).
The plan included the donation of money from community groups/municipalities for the purchase
of Board approved AED with the board covering the cost of training and maintenance. The
advice received from the Board insurer and the procedures in place/to be put in place to address
each matter was outlined.
In response to questions, L. Griffith-Jones advised the implementation plan will be reviewed
annually. The fundraising for AEDs would not be the responsibility of the school or school
community, but rather that of the larger community. The goal is to have one AED centrally and
strategically located in each school. The number of staff trained in each school is determined by
the size of the school and by the health and safety committee.
The report and recommendation to approve the implementation plan will come forward to
Trustees at their 2017 May 23 Board meeting. If approved, the annual cost of $20,000 to support
the initiative will be included in the preliminary 2017-2018 budget and the original trustee budget
initiative for AEDs will be removed from the list of initiatives to be considered. Trustee J. Skinner
spoke in favour of the plan.
d. 2017-2018 BUDGET PROJECTION – SURPLUS/DEFICIT
The 2017-2018 Budget Projection – Surplus/(Deficit) report was distributed. J. Pratt reviewed the
report highlighting the current projected structural deficit and describing its implications.
Discussion centred on the projected deficit budget and factors influencing the accuracy of the
projected budget surplus/deficit each year. J. Pratt reported on the current year budget noting the
final surplus/deficit position will be known in mid-November.
The Trustee Multi-Purpose fund was discussed. J. Pratt advised Appropriations are reviewed by
the Audit Committee; he suggested the Trustee Multi-year fund be reviewed by Trustees to
ensure it is staying true to the original intent of the fund.
e. ACCUMMLATED SURPLUS
The Accumulated Surplus balances at August 31, 2016 were r eviewed. The total available for
compliance for Ministry purposes was provided.
f. 2017-2018 CAPTIAL
A graph depicting the capital surplus (deficit) history and forec ast for 2017-2018 was presented.
The amounts for Board funded spending on capital assets and accumulated surplus committed to
capital projects were illustrated.
In response to a question, K. Bushell described how Board Support Capital funds effectively have
been used on capital projects not funded by the Ministry. He advised Board Support Capital
funds have been used to complete capital projects approved by Trustees through the
accommodation reviews.
Questions of clarification were addressed by Administration.
g. COMMITMENTS TO SYSTEM PRIORITIES
The list of current commitments to system priorities over the last three years was presented and
discussed. S. Macey advised on the changes to be made to the report.
Discussion centred on the musical instrument initiative noting 2017 -2018 is the last of the 5-year
commitment. In response to a question, R. Culhane advised the initiative has been well received
2017 May 16…. 3
and appreciated. He offered to bring forward a report in fall 2017 regarding how the investment
has been utilized.
G. Hart requested Administration consider putting forward a budget initiative request next year for
an expanded Environmental Education program.
h. PUBLIC INPUT – WRITTEN
Written public input received since the last meeting of the Planning and Priorities Advisory
Committee meeting was distributed and reviewed. In response to a question, it was noted
individuals submitting written input are acknowledged through a standard response noting their
input has been received and will be shared with Trustees.
6. OTHER BUSINESS - none
7. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS BY MEMBERS - none
8. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, June 13 at 6:00 p.m.
9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - none
10. ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 7:53 p.m.
RECOMMENDATIONS: None
C. GOODALL
Committee Vice-Chair
We build each student’s tomorrow, every day
Date of
Meeting: 2017 May 23
Item #: 14.l
REPORT TO:
☒
PUBLIC ☐
IN-CAMERA
☐
Administrative
Council
☐
Program and School Services
Advisory Committee
☐
Planning and Priorities
Advisory Committee
☒
Board
☐
Policy Working Committee
TITLE OF REPORT: Final Report of the Trustee Forums Ad Hoc Committee
PRESENTED BY: Arlene Morell, Trustee
PRESENTED FOR: ☒ Approval ☐ Information ☐ Advice
Recommendation(s): 1. That, at minimum, one or two Trustee Forums be held annually throughout TVDSB.
2. That the Trustee Forums Ad Hoc Committee be disbanded.
Purpose: To report on the activities and recommendations of the Trustee Forums Ad Hoc Committee.
Content: At the 2016 October 25 Board meeting, trustees approved the establishment of the Trustee
Forums Ad Hoc Committee to plan the 2017 Trustee Forums with a report to the Board no later
than 2017 May 23. At the 2016 November 22 Board meeting trustees A. Morell, J. Bennett, and R.
Tisdale were appointed to the Trustee Forums Ad Hoc Committee.
TVDSB Trustees hosted a series of Trustee Forums in London and in the counties of Middlesex,
Oxford, and Elgin. The Forums provided an excellent opportunity for parents, School Councils,
Home and School Associations, and school administration to engage with their local Trustees.
The Trustee Forums where held at the following locations:
City of London: Wednesday, February 22nd, 6:30 - 8:30 p.m.
London South Collegiate Institute, 371 Tecumseh Ave., London
Middlesex County: Thursday, February 23rd, 6:30 - 8:30 p.m.
Medway Secondary School, 14405 Medway Rd., Arva
Elgin County: Wednesday, March 1st, 6:30 - 8:30 p.m.
West Elgin Secondary School, 139 Graham St., West Lorne
Oxford County: Thursday, March 2nd, 6:30 - 8:30 p.m.
Glendale High School, 37 Glendale Dr., Tillsonburg
The agenda for the forums included:
Promoting events and initiatives taking place throughout TVDSB
Gathering feedback on draft policy;
TVDSB Policy, Assessment Evaluation and Reporting Student Achievement
TVDSB Procedure, Reporting Student Achievement
Sharing stories of student success
Networking with Trustees
The committee recommends Trustee Forums be held at minimum, once or twice annually
throughout TVDSB.
Having completed its mandate, it is recommended the Trustee Forums Ad Hoc committee be
disbanded.
Cost/Savings:
Timeline:
Communications:
Appendices:
Form Revised: January 2016
Relation to Commitments:
☐ Putting students first. ☐ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.
☐ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☐ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.
☐ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.
☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.