I'd like to thank the board for allowing me this opportunity speak on behalf of parents in
the Tytler District.
I'd like to reintroduce our main statement from our previous delegation on Jan 1ih.
"We are looking for long term attainable stability for our kids, their families and
neighbourhood"
Why we ask the Board to provide stability and long term commitment to our children
• 2010- ARC and Staff Recommended & Supported John McCrae to stay as our
home school
• 2011 -Trustees establish Edward Johnson as our new JK-6 home school
• 2012 - Staff recommends a move from Edward Johnson to a holding school at
King George
• 2014- No commitments are being made to where Tytler catchment will be with
the new boundary reviews
Bearing in mind that long term stability does mean different things to each family due to
their individual circumstances, I'd like to show the board the following two options for
our district that are our optimal solutions.
#1. To provide stability for our area by attending a walkable school- return the children
back to John McCrae- a truly walkable school for the residents.
#2. To provide stability for our area by continuing to attend their new home school
Edward Johnson which had been appointed to us by the Board last year.
#1 solution- John McCrae
It has been stated that KG is both our closest FI location and a 'walkable' school without
acknowledging that JM has been our neighbourhood walking school for many years.
So I'd like to take you through a walk to JM and KG -
#2 solution- Edward Johnson
Of the scenarios presented to us this year- Scenario 'C' is an agreeable scenario for us.
Even though, as staff suggested on the 1ih, 'we drive right by the school, so they should
go to KG' - Scenario 'C' allows for the Tytler district to achieve two goals.
1. It will fulfill our goal in long term stability for our children who believe this is our new
permanent home school.
2. It will provide the 'commitment' to this stability that to this date our Tytler Catchment
community has been denied but b/c of the commitment that has been made in report 3
that the Edward Johnson boundaries will not be touched in any of the upcoming boundary
reviews, we would be sheltered under Edward Johnson from further moves.
At this time, it has been acknowledged by staffthat scenario 'C' is 'not viable'. I'd like
to address the reasons that were presented that have taken this scenario off the list for
consideration.
-the boundary east of Victoria rd is awkward & doesn't follow a main road
This point is a soft reason that is based on pictorial aesthetics on a map and does not
face any of the real issues of boundaries that can not be gridded out in squares; a prime
example is the south end doesn't have any straight lines.
-EJ does not work as a neighborhood school for the Tytler area (KG is closer)
Neither EJ nor KG work as a neighbourhood school due to distance or barriers to walk to
these locations. EJ was not our choice, but this decision was made by the Board last year
and we have come to accept this and have made great efforts working with JM & EJ
schools, the teachers, families, and communities to make this transition to our new home
school EJ. To use the reason 'KG is closer' is not viable when either way, the children
still need to be bussed. The difference in kms from KG to JM is a mere 1.6kms
(additional time of3mins) This additional kms would not cause undue financial hardship
to the budget.
-the boundary for EJ includes some bussed areas which would fall within walking
distance to KG
As per the walking boundary map on the screen. I have outlined the EJ walking
boundary in solid blue while the boundary lines for scenario 'c' are in brown with the
shaded line. Due to KG being so close to EJ, it shows that the areas that would be
walking in the one zone, whether its KG or EJ would be captured by the other school.
The only area that would be 'bussed' separately with this scenario for EJ is the tytler
district which we have shown earlier that KG is not a viable walking school. Which
brings us to the question - Does the board support the idea that the children of Tytler
district will be forced to walk to KG just because it falls under the 2.4 kms parameters
setup in the transportation procedures manual even with the barriers and safety issues that
we presented?
To summarize- our number one priority is long term attainable stability for our
children. We feel there are options available that will give our community the
stability it needs and deserves. We feel there is room to consider returning us to
our walking neighbourhood school John McCrae or that we continue to stay at our
new home school Edward Johnson that was assigned to us last year by the board.
•
However - We do realize that the board has a number of constraints to base
decisions on in a very limited amount of time.
•
Therefore - We ask that the board recommend and approve that the current tytler
catchment families attending EJ will be provided with the option of
grandfathering with their siblings at EJ until grade 6 and that sufficient bussing
will be provided for the students who will be attending KG or EJ.