September 28 to October 19, 2012 In order to protect the identity of all individuals who have submitted correspondence with regard to the
King George JK-8 FI Boundary Review and in keeping with the Municipal Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act, all personal information and/or identifiers have been severed from all
recorded communication (i.e. e-mails and letters) prior to distribution. The intent or message has not
been changed.
September 28, 2012
It seems that the Victory over-run is an additional 60-70 students. Could this not be
accomodated by putting back portables that were recently removed?
Additionally could the parking lot not be repurposed for the same? With parking available at
Exhibition Park, plenty of residential parking available and Exhibition Arena having parking
spaces for staff could these options not be leveraged to minimize displacement of children?
October 4, 2012
Although I recently moved to KG area, we were in Tytler area before this. I wanted to express
my deepest concern that our Tytler area children will once again be moved OUT of the
boundaries for their current school (making it their third or fourth move) - KG.
This community is probably our lease resilient and these moves are putting pressures on our
least resourced community members. THis effects everyone - esp. children.
So just my wish that Tytler children are not, once again, the first to be shuffled around. There
is research evidence speaking to the real dangers of such on-going disruptions to this
community.
Please do not publish my name.
October 9, 2012
My daughter is currently receiving after-hours care through the Victory Kids' Club program
offered by Victory P.S. Should the boundary review deem necessary for her and others to be
moved to King George (which I am very much against), does/will King George P.S. offer a
similar program?
Having spoken to other parents about the boundary review subject, many are prepared to
switch their kids out of the French stream into English,rather than switch schools. This may
drastically change some schools' enrollment projections for the English programs. Food for
thought.
1 September 28 to October 19, 2012 October 12, 2012
I'm really dissappointed in the boundary review. We are less than 3 blocks away and walk,
ride or skate to school every day and now we would have to bus to school.
This seems contradictory to all that the board is advocating. Was there any thought put into
walking radius when the boundary? As there are children who are much further than us who
are still within boundary. It defies logic. I will be in attendance on the 23rd and am eager to
understand how we can in good consience make this recommendation.
Certainly not enough public consultation. Shame that you did not leverage more community
input on the scenarios like was done last review.
October 12, 2012
According to the report, there are 200 of 284 students enrolled in the French Immersion
Program. Averaging out 84 RT students over 8 grades (JK,SK, 1-6) is 14 students per grade.
Why are 14 students per grade being given priority? There is an obvious demand for French
Imeersion in our community.
Why has the board not adopted a French enrollment cap at the JK-Grade 1 level to prevent
these changes ahead of time? This would avoid people having to decide half way through
their child's education if they shpould continue in French or choose their home school.
Geographically, the proposed boundaries do not make sense. Someone living on Division is
far closer to Victory than someone living on Hamel.
Thank you for reading.
October 14, 2012
I am very unhappy with both options presented. Why were parents not included in this
process? I would like to know more about how you determined the projections of students for
future years. As a member of this community and knowing a majority of the new parents in
the Victory area, I feel the baby boom has ended here and we will actually see a decrease in
the numbers of students entering JK in the next couple of years. Already this year we are down
one kindergarten class from last year. Can you please provide me with the census information
that you used to determin your projections.
I do understand that cuts need to be made but why such a drastic number? Can't we
eliminate grade 6 French and English? That would be a more reasonable time frame.
Furthermore, we live 3 blocks away from Victory and we have been eliminated from the
school in scenario 2. I can't believe that children should be made to go to school over 2.4 K
away when Victory is 3 blocks away! What happened to healthy living? There is no way
2 September 28 to October 19, 2012 families can walk that distance with young children especially with the demands of work. If
scenario two is implemented than my children would get a bus to King George but their
friends one block away would not. They would be forced to walk to King George through a
secluded path and cross two major streets to get to school. How is this safe?
I feel you need to give the public more information to how you came to these two s
cenarios. Could you please provide the minutes?
October 15, 2012
With two young children, and living in the immediate vicinity of Victory P.S., we are once
again faced with potential upheaval of school plans for our children. We decided to put our
(now) 5 year old son in FI at Victory because of the possiblity of changing Victory French only.
We do not want our son bussing to another school when we have a great neighbourhood
school 3 blocks away. Now we are faced with 2 different scenarios. Either he busses to (yet
another) school starting in 2014, or starting in 2016, thereby being split up from his younger
brother. And I know several children who currently attend Victory FI who do not live within
the current boundaries. How is this possible? My children deserve the opportunity to walk to
school and live in the neighbourhood along with their school friends. When one lives 3
blocks away from a P.S. there is NO REASON why they should take a bus elsewhere. If I had
to pick one of the two scenarios offered, I would take the Jk-3 option at Victory, mainly in the
hopes that by the time my firstborn gets to Grade 3 the boundaries will need to be reviewed
again as King George will be overcapacity.
Thank you for your consideration.
October 15, 2012
I have a child in SK FI at Victory, and my 2 year old will attend in 2014. I would like to
understand how it is possible, in Scenario 2, that we are left with such a tiny boundary. Are
there really THAT many children attending FI at Victory within those boundaries? I know
children who are currently attending Victory who do not live within the existing boundaries,
but have after school care within the boundaries, thereby skirting the actual boundary rules.
If those living outside the boundaries were eliminated, would there really not be enough
space for the neighbourhood kids to go to their neighbourhood school? Something doesn’t
add up.
Thanks for your help.
October 17, 2012
I am writing to express my concerns with the recently released plan by the Upper Grand
District School Board with regards to Victory Public School. As a parent of 2 Victory students,
and a member of the Exhibition Park community, I am intimately aware of the importance of
Victory as a pillar of the community; a walk-able, community school with a excellent track
3 September 28 to October 19, 2012 record of serving the educational needs of children in grades JK-6, in the heart of a growing
and diversifying downtown. Victory’s strength is community; that which it fosters within its walls
by welcoming students in English and French Immersion programs, and that which it
facilitates through the school’s connections to its immediate neighbourhood, and the city.
From a school and community development perspective, both scenarios presented in the
Board’s plan are problematic and shortsighted. I won’t go into details in this letter, feeling
confident that members from the Victory community will voice their concerns. Importantly, the
timelines for public input and decision-making on this issue are ridiculously short, which is in
sharp contrast previous boundary reviews, which lasted several months.
Recognizing the growing population and space constraints, there are a number of other
viable scenarios, including this one: Victory needs to grow. The newer section of the school
has a flat roof. A second floor could be added to the facility. By my calculations, this would b
uild classroom space to accommodate 120-150 more students. At the same time, the school
facility does not currently meet legal regulations as set out by the Accessibility for Ontarians
with Disabilities Act, coming into law over the next 2 years. Fortunately, there is adequate
space available in the playground to accommodate the addition of an elevator. Not
discounting the effort and costs associated with renovation, these structural changes would
adequately meet the current and future needs of Victory, and the Board, the entire Exhibition
Park community, and the City of Guelph.
I urge the Board to lengthen the timelines for public input on this issue, and recognize the
many issues with the current proposed scenarios, welcoming the opportunity to build effective,
inclusive, long-term solutions.
October 18, 2012
The two proposals to changing Victory school will tear apart this community. Either children
two blocks away from a neighbourhood school will have to be bussed, or in grade four, the
English stream students will lose the majority of their friends as the French Immersion children
will have to go to another school. How enjoyable will it be to graduate from the English
stream as one of 16 students? What will moving grade four through six of FI do to the
mentoring of young FI students? Since the last change to our neighbouhood school, less
than 18 months ago, the vast majority of children walk to school with their friends and
siblings. Your proposals will change that dynamic significantly. Having a child already
moved to another school, I know that neighbourhood friendships do not always survive the
loss of school time interaction. If the first proposal goes through, when my daughter is in
grade four, I will have three primary school aged children in three separate schools. How am
I supposed to wait for my son's bus, then walk my Kindergarten aged daughter to school, then
get my grade four daughter to her school? Am I supposed to drive them? Will I have two
4 September 28 to October 19, 2012 children bussed to two different schools, with another to walk? Then there is the issue of
support. Who would I give my monetary support or volunteer time to?
When I was in school, primary only went up to grade five. What about that option? Then the
numbers are down,
the English and French streams stay together, and each stream has three years in middle
school instead of two. I would rather have Victory stay a community school for all the children
who live surrounding it up to grade five, than a segmented, neighbourhood-killing hodgepodge that serves no one except the tally books.
October 18, 2012
My son is in FI SK at Victory. My younger son will attend JK in 2014. I am concerned about
the boundary review. I have a question I hope you can answer. Is there a rule around
allowing exceptions to boundaries based on where after-school care is arranged? I know
several Victory students who do not live within the existing boundaries, but go to a
grandparent in the neighbourhood after school. Could you point me to the rules and
exceptions regarding attendance within Victory School boundaries? I’m not asking in order to
cause any trouble for other students, only to know what my options are for my own children.
October 18, 2012
Hi Maggie,
I just read the article in the mercury about the boundary review. I saw your comment that you
were surprised parents hadn’t shown up last night. The reason for this is very likely that the
UGDSB website indicated that a meeting was no longer taking place on Tuesday, but had
been moved to next Tuesday. I had planned on being at the meeting yesterday, and will
certainly be at the meeting next Tuesday, as this affects both of my children. We live north of
Division. We think it is unfathomable that we live 3 blocks from a Public School yet have to
send our children on a bus to a different neighbourhood, particularly when children further
away will still be allowed to attend Victory. Perhaps this is also the reason for the quiet from
other parents, we would never have imagined the review would affect us when we live so
close to the school.
Is there a possibility to revisit the boundary scenarios? I certainly have some thoughts, but
would need to see the details of how many children live in which areas to give intelligent
input. Please help me to get involved as I this is very important to us, and to many of the
families in our neighbourhood.
Warm regards,
5 September 28 to October 19, 2012 October 18, 2012
I am writing this letter as a concerned parent and resident of the Exhibition Park
neighbourhood. Currently there is a boundary review underway for Victory Public School to
relieve pressure on French Immersion enrolment. There are two solutions that have been
recommended by the committee. These recommendations are:
1Children in the current French Immersion area go to King George for grades 4-6. If a
family is located North of division children will get bussed to school. Families that are located
on the South side of division and below will have to get their children to school by other
means.
2Create a new boundary for children currently enrolled in French Immersion: Families
located on the North Side of Division and up go to King George K-8.
The rationale to support this change is two-fold:
1With the introduction of full day kindergarten there will be additional demand on class
rooms that are currently shared by Junior and Senior kindergarten. In addition, there is a
projected increase in enrolment over the next ten years which will trend approximately 100
children above carrying levels, which is currently 295.
2King George has been recently built and is currently a holding school for a number of
schools under renovation. It is expected that in 2014/2015 this school will be sorely under
utilized and needs to add students.
Problematic Projections
I have a concern with some of the rationale in point one of the rationales. Let’s first look at
the numbers. In Report 1 Victory 2011/2012 enrolment is 270. Projected enrolment for 2012
is 300. As a parent who’s children are at Victory Public School kindergarten. They have this
year reduced a full class of French Immersion on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Our children were
combined with another g class and the Junior Kindergarten population in this class is five
children, much less than the previous year. This speaks to a decrease in enrolment in 2012.
In addition a boundary review was just completed in 2010 which decreased the Victory Public
school boundary significantly. As part of the boundary review students affected by the change
in Grade 5 in 2010/2011 would be grandfathered into the 2011/2012 Grade 6 class. This
number would have contributed to the 270 enrolment in 2011/2012 and should contribute
to a decrease in demand in 2012/2013 as these students from outside areas will no longer
return.
Prior to 2011 Victory PS was accommodating close to 450 students and had an additional 2
portables that have since been removed. Victory accommodating close to 450 students is
available in Report 2 of the boundary review which illustrates previous and future projections.
Of interesting note in Report 2 it shows Victory above capacity 295 students in 2011, which is
6 September 28 to October 19, 2012 when the boundary review had taken effect and 2012. However we know that the 2011
enrolment numbers were actually 270 as published in Report 1 meaning that the problem
statement of potential enrolment demand may not be as large as envisioned.
The challenge with these projections is that it doesn’t accommodate the decrease in
population as a result of grandfathering of the 2010 boundary reduction and 2012 showed a
decrease in junior kindergarten enrolment. In addition, as stated earlier projects show a
starting point above 300 enrolment in 2011/2012 when we know actual enrolment was 270
students. So the overall projections could have a significant variance.
Finally, the revised boundary review of 2010 outlines an area which has little growth
capability. There are no new housing starts planned in the Exhibition Park area beyond 2014
and without new housing starts the numbers of new enrolment should stabilize as there will
not be new families moving into the areas in large amounts and less children as families
mature. Over the past 2 years there have been 60 home sales in the Victory French
Immersion area according to the MLS system. This number has actually had the reverse affect
on some French Immersion enrolment as incoming families will only be able to participate in
the program if they have attended French Immersion previously and some of these sales have
seen children enrolled in Victory FI leave the school. Of these sales more than 20% (15) were
outside the Victory English boundary which would also potentially decrease the overall
attendance of Victory PS.
Summary:
Does not allow for sufficient time to evaluate outcome of accommodation review of
2010
Bases projections on 2011 enrolment of over 300 when 2011 enrolment was 270
actual numbers.
Bases projection on continued growth when current incoming junior kindergarten
classes have been combined, meaning less incoming students.
Does not consider that no new housing starts are planned meaning demand will
stabilize and in the long term decrease as neighbourhood population becomes comprised of
older families.
Proposal Problems
Now let’s review the impact of both proposals. Part of the rationale of moving children from
Victory at Grade 4-6 age groups is that King George is in walking distance. I find this
assertion problematic. I currently live 700 meters from Victory public school. My children,
aged 5, walk or bike to school. They enjoy this as they encounter the classmates and the walk
is all on side streets and there are no major roads to cross. I enjoy the walk with my children
as it is 5 minutes for me to walk home, so I can maintain my current work schedule without
having to rely on pre-care or driving. Conceivably when my children are older they may also
be able to walk to school by themselves. Moving to King George would be a change to close
to 3 KMs with the need to cross 2 major streets, Woolwhich and Eramosa. My children would
7 September 28 to October 19, 2012 take approximately 40 minutes to an hour to make this walk. I may be able to walk back in
20-30 minutes, but the impact to wake times, breakfast would be large resulting in less sleep,
unnatural wake up times and potentially more pressure on eating breakfast quickly impacting
children nourishment and promoting bad eating habits. It would also likely require before
care, which is an additional financial burden, since a return walk of 20-40 mins would have
significant impact on work schedules.
The reality is that children will have to be driven. It is not feasible for a 9 year old to walk this
far, especially in the colder months. This isn’t aligned with the city, or boards objective of
walking to school. This also has an impact on costs to families when it comes to gas, and
negatively impacts carbon footprint of Guelph in either bus or family driven scenarios. Not to
mention school bussing will have both capital and operational budget impacts to the board.
In addition, it will likely eliminate the possibility of children walking themselves to school as
the distance and dangers are too great. The above impacts both scenarios.
As part of the 2010 accommodation review the commitment to my community was to
establish a dual track French Immersion and English program at Victory. I feel that with the
option 1 proposal this is not being achieved. A K-3 school is not a full French Immersion
program at Victory. It eliminates a buddy system and does not allow the younger students to
learn and be mentored by the older ones. In addition it divides the community as English
enrolled students will no longer have their age mate French Immersion neighbours to play
with on school grounds. In addition the logistical impact on parents who would have to drive
one sibling to school and arrange for the other to arrive at Victory seems avoidable.
Summary:
Impacts family logistics
Impacts children wake times
Impacts household income
Impacts carbon footprint
Impacts community unity
Impacts carbon footprint
Impacts healthy walk to school options
Bussing adversely Impacts school budgets
The Need for Another Option
The community needs a better solution. These proposals impact the unity of our community. It
takes neighbourhood children away from each other. It takes away parent’s ability to walk
their children to school. It adversely impacts household income. It adversely impacts Guelph’s
carbon footprint. It impacts siblings going to school together. It impacts the effectiveness of
the French Immersion program by taking away its older student leaders (I know our children
have reaped the benefits of reading buddies from older grades). This committee may be
serving the short term goals outlined in their objective, but it does not look at the problem
holistically: by generating additional attendance at King George they project that King
8 September 28 to October 19, 2012 George will be over capacity in a few short years. They will need to build portables to
accommodate. What will occur then? Another boundary review? Move children again? Close
Victory because there isn’t enough demand when children less than 3 blocks away are being
bussed to school? We need a solution that does not look at the enrolment as numbers, but as
people, families, playmates, as a value to a community. The objective has to be: how can we
keep the community in tact and address some of the challenges we foresee? We need to
move away from the solution being bussing children off to centralized super schools and
support community schools. If we do not, we could lose them.
The accommodation review is only in its second year of implementation. I do not believe
there is sufficient data as to date to make decisions that will have such an adverse affect on
the community. I implore the committee to allow for some additional years to elapse to
understand the true numbers and if there is an actual problem that needs to be addressed in
such a drastic manner. Let’s mitigate this pressure by building portables or renovating existing
floor space, to note there is currently a portable at Victory that isn’t in use. Victory, just two
short years ago, was supporting over 400 students, the 10 year projections do not come
close to this number. I agree attendance of 400 is not sustainable long term, but by building
out it does provide additional time to evaluate whether such a drastic measure is required.
We understand that King George will need additional students to fully utilize its footprint, but
please don’t pursue that objective at the expense of families and communities. If King George
is planning on decreasing play space to accommodate, let’s first explore that at Victory. If
we’re going to sacrifice play space let’s keep together play mates. I recommend that this
review is postphoned until 2015, one year after full day kindergarten to understand the true
impact and evaluate at that time whether there is a true need for something as drastic as what
is being proposed.
Please help us keep our community in tact.
9