More details on new elementary school plans
Stew Slater, Staff Reporter Construction of the proposed new elementary school on the site of the Pyramid Recreation Centre would necessitate the removal of about 20 trees currently lining the south and west of the existing west ball diamond. From the air, the one-storey building would be shaped like a ‘C’, with the ends
of the two wings facing the remaining east ball diamond so as to minimize the risk of broken windows from errant baseballs.
Detailed proposals for two Kindergarten-to-Grade 6 facilities were included in an Avon Maitland District School Board staff presentation at a regular meeting Tuesday, April 22 in Seaforth. The recommended option is a stand-alone school at the Pyramid Centre, but the report also included a
one-storey addition to the northeast portion of St. Marys DCVI.
Contrary to the request expressed in a several-hundred-strong petition earlier this year, board staff does not recommend constructing a stand-alone JK-8 facility at the Pyramid Centre; instead, under both scenarios in the report, Grades 7 and 8 students would be accommodated within the existing
DCVI.
Pressed by South Huron trustee Randy Wagler for an explanation about why no details were provided about a JK-8 proposal, education director Geoff Williams pointed to a portion of the report that states such details could be made available fairly quickly. “It remains an option that the board may, in fact, choose.”
The estimated cost for the JK-6 proposal at the Pyramid Centre is $7,058,997. At DCVI, projected costs are $6,664,094. The report states that, as part of a lease agreement for the Pyramid Centre property, the Town of St. Marys may require the board to pay for the relocation of the ball diamond – at what’s described as a possible cost of $300,000.
Under either option, about $94,000 in renovations will be necessary to provide four Grades 7 and 8 classrooms within DCVI. And a proposed $274,000 modernization of existing DCVI science labs –- to be shared between high school and senior elementary students –- would likely be undertaken even if no accommodation changes are made.
The report also hints at a $650,000 relocation of DCVI administrative offices from the centre of the building to an addition adjacent to the school’s west end. Baird-Jackson stated that, due to high costs, this relocation will not take place. But it seems clear –- especially since Avon Maitland officials have already said any Grades 7-8 facility would have its own dedicated vice principal –- that some renovation to the DCVI administrative offices will be necessary if either JK-6 option is chosen.
In any case, the projected costs of both proposals in the April 22 report are well above the $4,831,328 being provided by Ontario’s Education Ministry under its Prohibitive to Repair (PTR) program.
Williams suggested possible options for dealing with the shortfall include taking money from other areas of expenditure in the upcoming budget process, borrowing money, or pressuring the government to allow the board to immediately redirect the funds from the sale of St. Marys Central and Arthur Meighen. In any case, “we will need approval from the Ministry of Education” to undertake any project more expensive than the board’s PTR allocation.
Williams also said the board’s architect calculated a possible “total maximum savings” of 15 per cent if the board opts for construction materials or methods that are less expensive than those specified in the current proposal. The education director described these options, however, as “things the architect would not advise the board to do.”
For one St. Marys parent attending the meeting, the thought of spending less was not a consideration. Instead, Elizabeth Hill –- one of the driving forces behind the grassroots parent group that distributed the petition -– expressed concern about some of the things that aren’t included in either proposal.
“I’m encouraged that the board has listened to the community (regarding the favoured location of the new school) and continues to look for community input,” Hill said following the meeting. But she called on board staff to rethink their recommended omission of dedicated Music and French instruction spaces in the proposed school.
 “It’s still less than what we have now, and that’s not what we asked for,” she said. Board chair Meg Westley said little following the presentation; as is often the case, it was Wagler who brought forward the lion’s share of questions.
But Westley took up the cause a day later, in front of reporters gathered for a news conference in Stratford hosted by public education lobby group People for Education.
The focus of the news conference was declining enrolment, and Westley began her comments by sticking to that theme. “When we close a school that’s affected by declining enrolment, we would really like to see the Ministry
provide adequate funding so that the receiving school or the new school is a
step up for the families that are affected, rather than a step down.”
But from that, he quickly made the jump to the board’s challenge in St.
Marys under the province’s PTR formula.
“We’ve got a situation in St. Marys, with a prohibitive to repair
declaration, where the funding that we’re receiving from the Ministry is not
sufficient to build a quality school,” Westley said, when asked by People
for Education executive director Annie Kidder to address the media. “It’s
not even sufficient to build a bare-bones school ...This is not going to
satisfy the community.”
“Give us the funding that we need to create a positive learning environment
so that it feels like there’s some gain for the community ...Right now,
that’s not happening.”
Up next is a regular board meeting Tuesday, May 13 in St. Marys. Originally,
a final vote by trustees was scheduled for that meeting, but Williams
explained that “it seemed kind of odd to me that we would be asking trustees
to make a decision on the same night that they hear the input from the
community.”
It’s expected trustees will mull over the public input and other information
for an additional two weeks, then vote at a regular meeting in Seaforth on
May 27.