Proposed School Boundary Revisions - McRoberts

Meet with the parents and students face to face to discuss the LRFP- do not be satisfied with the illusion of consultation by burying the true plans in a 344 page document and only offering a Let's Talk forum to post ideas.

The rationale needs to be shared in a clear and meaningful way until people are convinced this is the best solution possible. And, if it turns out it is best that a school close down, then it should be done on the basis of criteria that makes sense to everyone involved. Do not try to pit schools against one another or see whose voices are the loudest.

The board has a responsibility to clarify what are the criteria to determine a solution, and how are these weighted? This must involve more than a "Let's Talk" online forum and must include open-minded, extensive, and TRANSPARENT thoughtful dialogue. We are creative and reasonable people and I am sure we can come up with a good solution which will be better than all the bad feelings and decisions that come about when plans are railroaded and the heart of community is disrespected. Again, I urge you to SLOW DOWN the process and seriously consider how to do this better.

The prospect of McRoberts closing down and splitting the French/English students is still not known to many- this information has not been shared in a transparent way and is buried in a 344 page report. This is insulting to the community and does not give a real opportunity to be involved in such an important decision. We must extend the consultation period to give more time to look at this and make a decision based on solid educational principles and community values (eg. community cohesion, school spirit, having continuity through the teen years, etc.).

I implore the Board to NOT APPROVE the boundary changes until they are considered ALONGSIDE the Long-Range Facilities Plan. Think about it: If the purpose of a school boundary change is "to reflect the regional strategy contained in the Long Range Facilities Plan", then the school boundary changes should NOT be considered (or consulted about) separately from the Long Range Facilities Plan, and yet this is how the process has been approached with the community "consultation". This is the basis for my concern with the consultation process.

Switching boundaries or worse, closing McRoberts, would affect so many families whose children are currently attending Whiteside and Bridge. We've been talking to other parents and many of us believe that McRoberts should not be closed and the boundary suggestions made no sense. Some even moved or rent in certain areas of the neighborhood, so they get to be in the catchment of McRoberts, or just so that their kids are closer to school. Changing that would affect our lives.

I think the board needs to be clear and transparent about what the real intention is with McRoberts. There are rumours that the board is trying to close this school. Looking at the redistribution of students it seems that to be the case.

1. Why have parents not been told in clear language?
2. Why has it been left for parents to read a massive document to try and put together implicit pieces of information about the school's future? Why has the board simply not been clear instead of hiding behind a thick document? I assume so they can say that they a) "consulted" b) the "information" was in the long range facilities plan...this cloak and dagger process is a sham.
3. What is clearly lacking is common sense. Looking at some of the redistribution of boundaries, it makes no sense to see student not attend the nearest school (students in south Richmond having to go all the way to Cambie when McRoberts or McNair is an option.