Editor: Everyone at the meeting tonight (Wednesday) at R.C. Garnett Elementary is attending to look out for the best interest of their child. This situation is going to create a huge divide among parents and students.
Some will say we should get rid of cross-boundary students. You will have parents of younger students say this is great, get rid of the Grade 6 and 7 students.
This is not the time for any of us to be divided, we need to stand together to look out for the best for all our children. No one but us will do so. We have proven time and time again that the school board does not care about our children’s best interest, as long as it meets the bottom line.
We have been dealing with the overcrowding issue for the past four years, and it has been falling on deaf ears.
Now that the district is building a new school and will not have full enrolment to ensure full funding, it wants to make it look like it is dealing with the overcrowding on the slope. Again, it becomes a Band-aid solution for the next two years.
The board has this crazy numbers thing that states there is a fixed number of students living in the catchment that cannot attend this school, due to maximum capacity. Now the district says it needs to plan for future enrolment at Garnett.
Kids living in this catchment who do not attend Garnett, but attend other schools by choice should not be factored into these numbers. We need to look at the kids who are here, and what we are going to do.
Realistically we have managed to operate for the past four years at maximum capacity, and capped out the school. There are solutions to ensure that no one needs to move if the board actually listens.
However, its main concern at this time is to ensure Lynn Fripps is full. What we say at the meeting is a moot point, and this meeting is just a formality to make it look like the board cares. If the board really did care, we would have trustees present. We are told they will not be in attendance.
The school can take over the resource room and create a new class for the new Kindergarten students attending in September. I’m pretty sure there would be enough space throughout the school to set up space to accommodate resource learning.
I’m sure that if the board sat down with the school administration, they could come up with solutions to ensure the students currently here could remain here. These are not ideal long-term solutions, however we have all been told that “It’s only two years until the middle school is built.”
So what’s two more years of dealing with this, when we have adapted to the restraints for the past four years.
The board is going to sell its pitch that it’s a new school, has two levels, we will bus your kids at a cost to the district, there are no portables, etc. It’s their job to sell this to us. It’s our job not to buy into it.
As for the generous offer of busing our kids, my concern is this. We currently have huge traffic issues at this school. Now you want to have buses come in and pick up our kids here. Who is going to supervise these kids before they board their buses in the morning and after school?
There will be 133 kids left unsupervised, being dispersed into the playground of a K-5 school — a school which didn?t feel they were important enough to be part of. This is not a well thought-out plan.
Perhaps the board is planning on parents rejecting the bus idea altogether, in hopes they will drive their kids to Lynn Fripps. Then the district would be off the hook for that cost.
The bottom line to all this is we all want what is best for our current students. We have been dealing with these issues for four years and managing. It hasn’t been ideal, but the school board created this issue and our staff, administration and students have all adapted. Really, what is two more years?
I say to the board, why create more unrest in a community you have not shown any respect for in the past four years? Take this opportunity to show the families on the slope that you actually want, for once, to do what is in the best interest of all the children, and come up with a solution that best suits this school.
My reaction to this issue was a knee-jerk reaction. After taking the time to look past my own personal unrest towards this. I realized that it should not be us vs. them. All of our children will be affected by this decision.
It is our responsibility as parents to ensure we look out not only for the best interest of our own children, but for all. No one’s child should be made to feel more important than another, and that is exactly what the board’s message to our children is — one group is more important than the other.
It’s a pretty strong message that is being sent. If the district thinks the Grades 6 and 7 students won’t hear that message loud and clear, it is wrong.
Brenda Driedger,
parent of Grade 5 student
at R.C. Garnett
