By Staff
October 30th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
There is no better news source than a citizen who has a vested interest in an issue – they are like a dog with a bone – they don’t stop chewing.
Parents from the Lester B. Pearson high school have been following events at the Halton District School Board very carefully – they think they have figured out what the Board is up to with the decision to close their community school.
On Wednesday October 18th, Stuart Miller, Director of Education was asked by Ward 4 trustee Amy Collard if he would expand on an article published by the Gazette in which we said the school board was well along with its thinking about how they would build a new administrative Centre.
A resident wrote us saying: “I watched with interest the Halton District School Board (HDSB) Trustee meeting of Wednesday Oct. 18, 2017 and in particular the question asked by Trustee Amy Collard to the HDSB Director of Education. Below are the question by trustee Collard and edited responses by Director Miller, Superintendent Veerman and Superintendent Cullen.
Ward 5 trustee Amy Collard glares at the Director of Education Stuart Miller during a very contentious debate.
Trustee Amy Collard questions: “… there was an article published two weeks ago, perhaps a little more than that, about the new administration building. And I was wondering if I could get some more information about how far we are along with this process and where the funding for that building comes from. Because there seems to be some concern that the funding comes from areas where the students might benefit from and if there will be any type of community consultation … and just what the steps are going forward and when we anticipate seeing the next report on this?”
In several of the paragraphs that follow the writer has kept the pauses that were part of the answer.
Director of Education Miller responds: “… I read the article as well … and there is … ah … it is not … there are inaccuracies in it. Ah … we are prohibited from taking money that would be for student use …ah … prohibited from using proceeds of disposition … all those things to use for an admin. Centre. We can’t use any of these funds to build an education admin center.”
Superintendent Lucy Veerman
Superintendent Veerman states: “… any funding for new buildings would have to come from the sale of existing higher administrative buildings or anything that is not school related.”
Superintendent Cullen states: “… the … ah … status of that … as you recall we have been working on the original outline scope plan … in … in … broad-brush strokes around me. Some of the comments in the article … ah … again were inaccurate around the need for a … ah … new building in terms of the population of the staff currently and in the future. And that again was all outlined in the staff report not the article referred to.”
Trustee Collard asks a follow up question: “Is it perhaps … um … prudent to communicate as to the community that how such a building would be funded and perhaps engage the community a little bit on this?”
Director Miller replies: “… we discussed that and we suggested it is probably not prudent … um … at this point, … because I think it just … it stays out there for a longer period of time and I think … ah … we end up in debates about it … and so …”.
“I have attached a link – you can follow the conversation. might see the responses.”
Our writer adds: “Here is an interesting inaccuracy that ought to be pointed out:
“The questions by Trustee Collard to Director Miller and responses shown above are not reported, summarized or mentioned in the Trustee Questions and Comments 5.8 section of the Oct. 18th , 2017 Minutes of the Halton School Board Trustees meeting.
“Was the article Trustee Collard refers to “being published 2 weeks ago or perhaps before that” from the Burlington Gazette published on October 7th, 2017 and titled “Is there a link between the closing of two Burlington high schools and the plans for a new administration office?”
“The Oct. 7th article for the most part quotes the Halton District School Board: Accommodation Study for Long Term Administrative Office Needs which can be found appended to Feb. 17, 2016, Board Agenda and Minutes on Pages 61 through 91 (assigned HDSB Report 16038 dated January 29, 2016).
“I believe the only inaccuracy was the typographical error of the date of the HDSB meeting minutes of February 2017 instead of February 2016.
“I am surprised, that Director Miller mentioned “… I read the article as well … and there is … ah … it is not … there are inaccuracies in it.” Typically when inaccuracies are mentioned the inaccuracy is identified. However, it makes me wonder due to the speech pattern and stumbling of Director Miller whether the inaccuracies occurred at all or if this was an attempt to discredit without evidence the article? The same applies to Superintendent Cullen … “Some of the comments in the article … ah … again were inaccurate around the need for a … ah … new building …”.
“The article to which Trustee Collard referred did not state where the money was coming from so again, I wonder why amount of concern by the Director and staff other than answering Trustee Collard’s question?
“Remember: all the HDSB money comes originally from the taxpayer and therefore all assets belong to the taxpayer.
“Is this an attempt to deflect from the chutzpah (unmitigated gall or audacity are other terms that could be used to describe the spin the Director tried to put on this matter) of closing two Burlington high schools, then building a $29.6 Million administrative facility and stating “This is not a question of quantity of space, but rather of quality of space.” and “… and in turn, create a facility that reflects the Board’s values, resulting in the delivery of the highest quality education for the Board’s students.”
Those Pearson parents are like a dog with a bone – they don’t stop chewing.
Article on the Board of Education thinking about a new administrative building.
“Is there a link between the closing of two Burlington high schools and the plans for a new administration office?”
Yes, this is one critical question. However, the question I posed to my HDSB trustee, Ms. Collard, earlier in the month was: why is the Board even considering the building of a new administrative office in the first place?
Those of us who have spent time living and working in the real world know full well that many companies and organizations operate out of multi-site locations. Yes, I am sure it would be just swell if all the HDSB staff were housed under one roof. However, the sun will still rise in the east and set in the west if HDSB employees work out of different sites.
If you need additional space here is how you get it: 1) you put all of your customer facing staff and those who need and require contact with the general public in the main HDSB office; 2) you lease space for those employees who are in support roles that don’t require public interaction (e.g. Information Technology; Procurement; Facilities). Notice I used the word “lease”. Frankly, as long as support personnel have access to other employees by phone, e-mail, video-conferencing, or text they don’t need to be housed under one roof and they don’t need to be in a built facility. Who cares if these folks are in a building on the North Service Road? In fact, many of these employees could likely work from home…another cost-saving initiative this Board needs to seriously explore.
It’s a sad commentary when ordinary citizens in the community have a better grip on reality than elected officials and those entrusted with the public purse.
good on the pearson crowd. Students should always come first and I am sure $29 million could fix a lot of deficiencies in schools we have to benefit students why should the board admnin have a taj mahal untill all school needs taken care of. if board office lacked space okay but seems that is not the case. Currently lots of room to expand at upper middle/Guelph line if growth was the need. A whole field exists facing guelph line empty and never used.
Keep up the good work Pearsonfolks.