The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

2- The Oakville Beaver, Friday July 4, 2008 www.oakvillebeaver.com Mixed reactions to school board decision Continued from page 1 in this process from the beginning," said a teary-eyed Denise O'Connell, whose son will be in the first junior kindergarten class at Clearview Public School in 2010. "I wanted the best education for the kids in our community and this was the way to do it. I think this is really going to give Ward 3 years and years of great education for our children. It was really the only option that made sense." The recommendation passed by the board was not the preferred option presented by a committee of trustees, parents and teachers called PARC 14. That group met for the past year to present the board with a proposal on how to best find a solution to the overcrowding of students at some schools in Ward 3 and the underpopulation at others. Many of the 80 parents at Wednesday night's meeting expressed their discontent that the PARC recommendations were not approved. "It makes me wonder what the PARC process was for," said Lesley Hills, a parent at Chisholm. "Why did they put everyone through this whole process only to not go along with what they recommended? It was 10 months of work with 41 members who came to a conclusion that didn't happen." The PARC 14 committee's proposal included closing New Central and Brantwood schools by September 2009, with no new school for the Clearview community. This option would feature Chisholm Public School with a JK-6 English stream, Linbrook Public School CHRIS KORNACKI / OAKVILLE BEAVER SIGN OF CHANGE: The halton District School Board has decided to build a new school on this plot of land in the Clearview neighbourhood of east Oakville. with a JK-6 English stream, Maple Grove Public School with a 1-6 French Immersion stream and E.J. James Public School with a 7-8 dual track program. "Their (PARC 14) input was considered very carefully by the board and very seriously by administration, but at the end of the day, the PARC process is to gather public input, it isn't to make the final decision," said Wayne Joudrie, director of education. "It is the board's decision to do what it believes is in the best interests of the students in Halton." The PARC process is going to be under review after Wednesday night's meeting, Joudrie said. While the board approved the recommendations put forward regarding north Oakville schools by PARC 16B this spring, the decision not to go forward with the PARC 14 recommendations opens the door for possible changes to the process, according to Joudrie. "The experience of 16B and 14 were different, and part of the reason I think it was different in 14 was that it had a long history going back almost 20 years of aborted attempts of dealing with accommodation issues, so there were many agendas and old, hardened agendas that made it a much more difficult accommodation review process," he said. "Having said that, I think there is plenty of opportunity for improving the process. When the dust settles on this one, one of the things we'll be doing is talking with constituents, as well as the trustees and senior team that were involved in it, and ask what worked, what didn't and how can we make it better." The motion to put the three-school model of recommendations on the table, with some alterations, was put forward by Philippa Ellis, trustee for Ward 3 Oakville. She presented fellow trustees with a long list of reasons for supporting this model, citing elements like school size (the population will be split between the three schools, with roughly 500 students per school), JK­8 continuum of learning, centrally locating one school for French immersion, and minimizing bussing of students, among others. "Schools of 500 drive the optimal number of staff, facilities and resources, so if we have to rearrange kids because we've got schools that are far too under occupied, then this was an opportunity to drive forward to the future and give the kids the best we can offer," Ellis said. "No one takes joy in closing a facility, but I'm excited because I think this will meet the needs of the kids in the ward and people, I believe, will come to see that their kids will have more opportunities, far more support, more guidance and more leadership in their school." The board did not discuss the preferred PARC 14 option at the meeting. The one-hour debate before the vote focused solely on the wording of one of Ellis' recommendations involving the renovations of E.J. James and Maple Grove schools. Ellis's initial wording meant the board would renovate the buildings to the standards of new schools in Halton. Several trustees said they were uncomfortable being bound to renovate the schools to that level. After much debate, it was amended, so that a study of the facilities will be done, with construction plans approved by the board by January 2009. The school closure issue has been followed closely by parents in southeast Oakville. Wayne Joudrie said that trustees received more than "It makes me wonder what the PARC process was for. Why did they put everyone through this whole process only to not go along with what they recommended?" Lesley Hills, Chisholm school parent 1,000 e-mails from parents and concerned residents during the PARC 14 process. The high emotions prompted the board to invite two members of the Halton Regional Police Service to Wednesday's meeting. However, their services were not needed as parents were peaceful and insults were not exchanged between various groups in the boardroom or the lobby. Much of the conversation that followed the decision was about the PARC recommendations. While many expressed discontent that the proposal was overlooked, there were those who were involved in PARC 14 who supported the board's decision to choose an alternate option. "For 20 years we've not had a school," said an ecstatic Michelle Sloane, president of Clearview Oakville Community Alliance. "A lot of residents said if they didn't win, that they would move out and now they will stay. We had great community support and whenever we needed them, they were there and we did well. We're feeling good because the PARC recommendations did not offer the best long-term solutions. It was keeping all the schools in the neighbourhoods, but was not looking out for the future." Other parents, however, were left wondering why the board is fixing something they say isn't broken. Tom Dalby has two children who attend Chisholm school. He said schools like that can't be built overnight. "It doesn't make sense to build a new school when there are already perfectly good ones," he said. "You take a school like Chisholm that works well already and it is a tough thing to get that right. You don't just build a school and get it right. When it is already the best school we've got, with great community involvement and teacher involvement, a great piece of land with enough green space, to take it down because it is in the wrong spot doesn't make sense." The new decision means See School page 5