Any plan to build Second English PS?

[szchsong]

In Steve MacLean PS, it has already had 7 portable classrooms. It has a need to build another English PS.

Does anybody know if there is any plan to build another English PS?  If not, can't image how well it will be...

 

[benji]

There's no need to build a SECOND public school in a *relatively* small community. The problem is that whoever commissioned Steven McLean rather have had a modern look and funky, unfunctional space, instead of building for the projected size of the community. I think the existing school should be expanded, not a whole new one built.

[ccudmore2]

There will in time be a second and third school, seeing as the community is probably only 20% built. However I don't think a second school is justified yet. The fundamental problem with a growing community is that, well, it grows. Right now SMPS is at say 120% capacity. If they built another similar sized school you'd end up with two schools that at at 60% capacity. Not a good situation either. If they built SMPS to hold 20% more children, it would eventually have 2 portables as well. So no matter what size you built the school the community would eventually grow to the size that it would need portables. So we'll have some more growing pains as the community grows and grows. Eventually SMPS will be at whatever the point is where it's justified to built a second school. I'm not sure what that is, maybe 150% capacity?

Another issue that drove the choice of the size of the existing school is the long-term capacity needs. A new community generally attracts young families and with that comes a lot of kids. 18 years later those kids grow up and move out of the house (at least that's my hope with my kids) and the number of kids decreases. They don't want too many schools or schools with too many spaces that will force them to close them. The better plan long-term is to have the school over capacity while the initial bubble of young kids works its way through and then have the school closer to actual capacity once the populate becomes more stable.

[momoffour]

the board owns property at Earl Armstrong and Spratt rd. They plan to build a highschool which will house Grade 7 -12. This will move the 7 and 8s out of SMPS and allow for a bit more room. Problem with creating schools is you have to project numbers 5 years in advance from the BEGINNING of the building process (this would have been 10 years ago!SOOO really projections were made 10 years ago to base funding on need and need on funding). Portables are a good thing because it enables the board to push for schools to be built sooner rather than later in our area.

[Vichey]

So here we sit just a mere four years after the opening of Steve MacLean Public School (2006) a 60,000 sq. ft. school built for a 595 student capacity. This school year there were seven (7) portables on-site and as of this September there will be 12 (my understanding is this is the maximum limit). For the upcoming school year they are projecting an enrolment of about 879 students -- that represents a capacity of 168%!

There is currently no plan, that I am aware of, to build the supposed public high school that would off-load a small portion of the student population and repeated cries from the Board that they have "no money" to build additional schools. I would really like it if SOMEONE would tell me where all the children of our community are supposed to go to school then? Our community continues to expand and the demographics are extremely unlikely to change for many, many years to come.

Does anyone see any portables or capacity issues at the other two schools? No! Why because they exclude enrolment to the majority of the representative population. Time for us to return to common sense and sensibility -- the way it used to be -- one board, cut the unnecessary overhead of multiple administrations, stop dividing the available tax dollars.

This is yet another bullet point in the list of inadequate planning for a so-called "planned" community, where is the forward thinking and leadership, as opposed to a patchwork approach -- a far cry from what was promised for residents of this neighbourhood. If it is true that projections were made 10 years ago and reality demonstrates just how off-target the system is, what other projections have been under-estimated?? I am certainly curious.

To others who are (or should be) equally as concerned about this and similar issues, I implore you to continue to ask questions and demand answers. We talk about it with one another, on the playground, in the school yard, in the grocery store but it hasn't been enough. We need to contact our trustee, the board, whoever will listen.

[RS couple]

The public board doesn't have any money. They haven't managed their money well for years.

The Catholic board would be a better bet, I think. They seem to think more long term.

[mbcc]

One piece of info I have heard it that in order for the Board to build a new school in a community the current school must be over enrooled (over 100% capacity) for 5 years, it then takes approximately 5 years to get things in order and a new school built. This is even in cases where they already have the land in place for the proposed school. I am not sure if this info is completely accurate so please correct me if I am wrong...
I will also add that I am frustrated by it as a parent who has a child entering Steve Maclean this year. I can't possibly imagine where all of these children are going to go in the coming years. This community is only getting bigger and let's be honest, most of the newcomers are young couples who will have children in the next couple years or families with school aged children.  We need to see our community's needs met on all levels, especially education.

[Vichey]

MBCC - thanks for that information, I shall make some further queries as to the 5-year issue. It hardly seems like rocket science to know without a shadow of a doubt that over-capacity at SMPS is a no-brainer for MANY years to come. To sit and wait seems beyond ludicrous.

RS couple - One of the contributing factors to the lack of funds, is the Catholic board received public funds. As I stated, we should have a one board system and pool the available tax/public funds. As you will recall the Catholic school system used to be private, so it's easier to manage funds when you have fewer students to deal with and you have an exclusionary system based on religion. Try getting into St. Jerome if you aren't Catholic, I can assure you they don't make it even remotely easy, yet they are supposed to since they receive public funds. Of the 80 Catholic schools in the Ottawa area only 26 will accept non-Catholics ... it's just wrong.

[Brooke135]

Wow

[Brooke135]

There was a time when the Catholic board was privately funded. I believe 1984 under Bill Davis, the conservatives decided to publicly fund these boards. I direct my taxes to the catholic board and if you think about it, why would I have to give my school taxes to the public board by default and then have to privately fund the catholic board. If that's the case, the french boards both public and separate should be privately funded. But you never hear that. School boards are funded by the # of students enrolled. As a rule, the Catholic board is almost always first to build in an area where there are no schools yet. And thus take public as well as Catholic students. When the province looks at this they are funded accordingly. Once the public board opens their school, enrollment temporarily drops at the separate school, and the public school obviously fills up quick due to demographics of the community. It was unbelievable how fast portables came into use at SMPS. Planners have to figure on lots of kids given the type of community, so why not build a school big enough to support it using todays dollars. It won't be cheaper 5 yrs from now. And these portables aren't  public board specific. Look how many are at St. Marks in Manotick, Untill they built St. FX here.
As someone said in this forum, a lot of public schools are\were being left open with dwindling enrollment due to the pressure from the local parents. Understandable. You want your child to finish their education locally. But in todays economic climate, you can't have it both ways. If you are losing money at a half full school, how do you finance a new school. There is only so much money allocated to the board. So you move where the work is and you build schools where the kids are\will be.
So, do we need a public hs. Absolutely. But every year, the public board has trouble bringing a balanced budget. Until they make the tough choices (to close schools and find money for new ones)the senior kids in our neighbourhood have to pay the price. But please don't blame the separate board. There is no conspiracy, maybe just better fiscality. This is way too long.

[RobnCher]

The choice to fund catholic over public is only a vote of conscious. It means nothing. zero. nil. nada.

Both school boards are funded by the province based on enrollment. If everyone in RS chose catholic it would have zero effect on their bottom line. Now if everyone moved their children, then the funds follow. If you are not catholic, you do not even have the right to opt to direct your taxes to catholic. Ask any non-catholic that enrolled their children in the catholic school board and you will find that they weren't even asked to opt to divert their taxes, it is not an option.

Follow the link and note the explanation for block C http://www.ottawacatholicschools.ca/media.php?mid=42993

Beyond that, the absence of a middle school to off-load the 7-8 students from Steve MacLean is a sham. Just separating these kids would make a difference on the school population.

[Wildshore Willy]

They offloaded three more portables behind Steve MacLean PS last week.  Now up to 12.  Soon there will be no yard left for the kids to play. 

But hey, keep on building houses... maybe they can stack the kids like legos.  Or what the heck, send them over the bridge on the bus to Barrhaven.