Trustee Spencer and I moved two motions to be debated at the March 13th board meeting (www.livestream.epsb.ca) that will start the discussion about how we make public education work in established neighborhoods. The school closure moratorium committee has been a very informative process, but looking twenty years down the road we need to figure out how all of the pieces work together, and if options like brand new replacement schools can be part of the mix.
Please read our moratorium committee recommendations to help keep schools open, here. We know we need a new utilization formula that reflects the true use of school space and we know that we need some excess capacity built into the system to incorporate the return of families to established neighborhoods. However, ultimately keeping schools open depends on local kids going to local schools and the demographic changes required to repopulate many of our neighbourhoods (using all statistics available) is going to take much, much, longer than I had anticipated when I was a trustee candidate.
I want to be clear that our board remains committed to the moratorium, which expires in November 2012. Administration continues to review all of our facilities and programs, but as a board we will continue to examine ways to keep schools open and investigate new and collaborative partnerships that might support more of our schools. For instance, I have been pushing for more collaboration with the separate school system (Journal: school boards will consider sharing space.)
What do we do when a school enrollment is dropping to the point where a regular program might have 50 children? What do we do when a choice program is located in a place that isn’t serving the local students or community? What do you do when you have two half-empty schools located in the same neighbourhood? What do you do when your budget is stretched further and further, but your costs are growing faster than your revenues?
These motions are informed based on the feedback I have been receiving from school councils and community consultations throughout my campaign and my term in office (What can we do to attract more families back to established neighbourhoods?) It is also a reflection of my learning as a trustee as I’ve been working with my colleagues to grasp the complexity of our space and infrastructure needs and the changing demographics in our city. While we can (and should) keep the vast majority of our schools open for when our neighbourhoods refill with young families, in the short term there may need to be a few changes in declining areas that have multiple schools– sometimes in the same neighborhood (or under a kilometre away.)
As the moratorium comes to an end, I believe that given our 197 schools in Edmonton, we need to evaluate, if every single one of these schools is best serving their local community and hear from our administration about possible opportunities. As trustees, we need to be willing to hear our options they can bring forward.
Additionally, we need to make sure that the closure cost-savings (estimated at a million per closure by administration) follow the children to the receiving school so instead of them just being inconvenienced by change, they can be offered something better.
Trustee Spencer and I put these motions on the table to start the conversation with our board on March 13th.
What do we do when the moratorium expires?
- Did we get the suggested numbers right?
- Are there other criteria we might be overlooking?
- Are there other short-term opportunities to support schools?
- “It’s not what you take away, it’s what you leave behind.” What should we focus on leaving behind?
Please review these motions and provide your feedback. Please sign up for my newsletter on the right hand side of this page so I can email you information as it comes forward. You can always email me Michael@michaeljanz.ca on this or any issue.
Trustee Spencer: 1. Building on the Elevate Report recommendations, that the District develop a 20-year infrastructure plan, in conjunction with communities, other levels of government and school boards, to enrich life-long learning opportunities and provide supports for children and families, and which may include renewal of existing facilities, modernizations, consolidations, replacement schools, cross-district partnerships, expansions, right-sizing and new school construction. The plan should include some small schools in the spirit of the District’s commitment to offering choice for families. Trustees will contribute to creating effective public engagement around this work, with the Moratorium Committee providing oversight, and its terms of reference shall be considered amended to include this function.
Trustee Janz: 2. Planning in the District shall continue to emphasize the importance of providing excellent educational opportunities experiences for all children and supporting neighbourhood schools to serve children and communities. The Board shall continue to advocate at the municipal level for urban renewal through new family-friendly housing and at the provincial level for adequate maintenance and infrastructure funding.
Leading up to the expiration of the Moratorium in November 2012, the Administration shall work with stakeholders, including students, parents, community members, tenants and other levels of government, to bring forward recommendations in December 2012 to take effect September 2013 for consolidation, expansions, right-sizing schools, space sharing with other districts, or replacement schools, including the possibility of school closure, using the following criteria:
a. Consider schools that are located in the same city neighbourhood as, or less than 700 meters from another EPSB school and where there is comfortably enough space to bring together students in one facility while continuing to offer the existing range of grades and programming options.
b. Consider schools which do not offer regular programming and which have an enrolment of less than 100 students.
c. Consider schools which draw from an attendance area where there are less than 80 EPSB students residing at the elementary or junior high levels.
The Administration shall also conduct programming fit reviews at schools where a regular or alternative programming stream has enrollment of less than 80 students.
This work shall be informed by the District Priorities, with an emphasis on equity and healthy transportation, as well as the work of the Moratorium Committee, previous public consultation processes, and the recommendations included in the Elevate report to support strong schools and strong communities.
To fully examine the work we are doing to try and support schools, and our growing infrastructure pressures, please take a few minutes and read the research done through our school closure moratorium committee process. To see the information reports on the causes of closures, check out presentations on:
- 1. Urban Growth Patterns
- 2.Aging School Buildings and Infrastructure Deficit
- 3. Instructional and PO&M Funding
- 4. District Enrolment Trends
- 5. Space Utilization
- 6. Alternative Programs and Open Boundaries
- 7. Leasing
- 8. Concluding public forum
- http://www.epsb.ca/trustees/ClosureMoratorium.shtml
By administration numbers, our infrastructure costs outpace our revenues by $34.4 Million. Those costs are then paid for out of our operational budget (classroom dollars.) In some cases, there are very good reasons to do this (For example, keeping a small school open serving a high-needs population, or maintaining our commitment to choice in an area with limited educational opportunities.)
Can we say this is the case for every single one of our 197 schools? I don’t know the answer, but the motion above means that in certain circumstances, we need to be willing to hear about our options.
Plant Operation and Maintenance
Annual revenue $66.0 million & IMR funding $14.5 = Total $80.5 Million
2010/11 audited costs
Custodial $37.9 + Maintenance $25.2 +Utilities $24.3 + IMR 12.3 + Facilities Admin $9.6 + Amortization $5.0 = Total $114.3 Million
4 Responses to “What happens after the school closure moratorium expires in November 2012?”
From a Pleasantview resident via email:
I live in an “inner city” neighborhood. Here are some of my thoughts (actually opinions – possibly wild) and questions:
· Many of the schools are physically old and, while they may be attractive on the outside like Norwood, are hard to upgrade for today’s education needs (mainly the HVAC, but also for computers and smart boards). Is there a point where the building is no longer viable?
· What is the optimal combination of student numbers and resources so that an effective program can be offered? I know that students can learn well in many different circumstances but a critical mass seems to be needed.
· Many schools were built for the baby boom, and we have not had those numbers or that school age demographic for 50 years. When you have a school or a clusters of schools that have been under-enrolled since my kids went to school (30+ years ago), then I think some have to be closed. As a tax payer, I don’t think it’s a good use of dollars. As a public school supporter who wants a child to receive the best education, I want there to be a critical mass of students so that there can be the full complement of programs and teachers (e.g., an elementary school should have about 250 students K – 6). The question with the buildings will be whether the school-age demographic will change before the buildings reach the end.
· Many people want their children to go to the “local school” because their children can walk and because they will have friends in the neighborhood. I support the idea of kids walking and being able to take a short bus ride by themselves (for physical activity and independence), but many parents drive or walk their kids to a local school and never let their kids play in the neighborhood unless it is an arranged play date. So are we paying lip service to a myth? The Catholic system could never promise schools that were within walking distance, and parents and kids got used to that. Is the question that children shouldn’t have to cross a major road? Then let’s deal with that.
· Provincial funding is tied to available space. In the late 70s and early 80s, we had 10 years where the only school built was Grace Martin at a time when Mill Woods grew to the size of Red Deer. A whole generation of school kids were bussed. This was because of the “empty spaces”. Does there need to be a more flexible funding formula?
· In 1979, when my daughter started kindergarten, I looked at the budgets and enrolment of every public school. At that time, one third of all the schools were running at less than 50% capacity. It was ridiculous then, and nothing really was done after the attempt to close Malmo School failed.
· Public schools in New York have been converted into condos. Could add to residential diversity but the green space of the school grounds needs to be retained for the neighborhood.
· I’ve always thought that having two school systems that never or rarely share space or resources is a stupid duplication of resources. I understand the argument for an all-encompassing Catholic education, but I wonder if kids are sent to Catholic schools to make them better Catholics (especially when you look at the stats on church attendance), because it is the closest school, or because parents see different values, more discipline, more structure, or other reasons. Is there a need that the public system should look at to pull students from the Catholic system? Should the systems compete? I’m a public school supporter, so I think families have a right to publicly funded non-sectarian education. I know Catholic education is part of the great Canadian compromise and the Manitoba schools issue – it may be hard to get past history.
· School use by the community/groups – I understand that part of the problem with allowing this to happen is the costs of cleaning and maintenance. If it could happen more, it would connect the school to the community (even those people without kids in school).
· If you have a capital plant, it should operate all year. I think some students lose ground over two months in the summer.
· Language programs need to have the whole school. This is a must for immersion programs. Otherwise there is not enough exposure to the language for kids who normally speak English. If the need is for ESL, then the school should be “English immersion”. That would mean relocating a “regular program” rather than running it along side.
· It’s more important to feed kids who need it than keep an under-enrolled school open.
· It’s more important to have the right resources for special needs kids (and all kids) than to keep an under-enrolled school open.
· It’s more important to have field trips than to keep an under-enrolled school open.
· I don’t buy the argument that “it’s a small school and everyone knows my kid”. Usually there are three grades together, and a program that’s missing lots of elements.
· I’m absolutely in favour of having good and diverse educational opportunities for the inner city area. These neighborhoods need much higher density (which many people might not want).
Education needs must come first – the conversation should be about educational sustainability and improvement. Maybe a community development approach to reaching and engaging more students and families and to enhancing the education experience would work. And it might have a synergistic effect on community revitalization.
on March 13th, 2012 at 12:44 pm #
[...] on school closures expires in November. Trustee (and, full disclosure, my good friend) Michael Janz wrote about this a couple of weeks ago, explaining the motions coming forward March [...]
on March 17th, 2012 at 7:58 pm #
[...] · A motion from Trustee Janz about asking the Administration to prepare for the end of the Moratorium by bringing forward a series of recommendations re: schools and programming to be put into effect by September 2013. (Read more at: http://www.michaeljanz.ca/2012/02/what-happens-after-the-school-closure-moratorium-expires-in-novemb...) [...]
on April 4th, 2012 at 5:10 pm #
… [Trackback]…
[...] Read More: michaeljanz.ca/2012/02/what-happens-after-the-school-closure-moratorium-expires-in-november-2012/ [...]…