Okanagan-Skaha trustees have bitten the bullet and brought down the axe on three schools, one of which both of my daughters attend.
My youngest was dismayed by the board’s decision, saying she didn’t want to go to another school.
It’s hard to believe that a similar decision could be rendered in Osoyoos on April 6, when the board is expected to vote on the controversial motions of closing either Osoyoos Elementary or Osoyoos Secondary.
Justifiably, numerous concerns have been raised by parents and community leaders. But adults tend to forget how resilient young people are in dealing with change and upheaval. This is what teachers have been instilling in our children – resiliency.
Penticton students who will lose their schools will no doubt carry on and adapt to their new surroundings. And Osoyoos students will do the same if they merge with Southern Okanagan Secondary School.
Pupils with special needs or mental health issues will no doubt suffer greater impacts, but staff will ensure they do not fall through the cracks.
But the bigger impacts we see are those affecting the housing market and business development in Osoyoos. What family or new business would consider moving in to the community that has lost a school?
According to Save Our Schools chair Brenda Dorosz, her survey indicated that nearly 40 per cent of respondents said they will either move out of Osoyoos, or their child will seek education outside the district (if the high school is closed).
She also points to impacts on after-school employment, the safety risk of additional bus runs, and the loss of school volunteers.
There is also the valid concern about parents being 20 minutes away from their children if an emergency (illness or accident) occurred.
Under budget considerations, a number of suggestions have been made, including: change to a four-day school week; eliminate network leaders, streamline school board administration; eliminate principal positions; and move the board office to a school.
Dorosz goes as far as suggesting that the school board stop ordering catered meals and start “brown-bagging it” to work.
Sounds fair, doesn’t it?
The 2016-17 structural deficit is forecast to increase from $600,000 to $1.1 million. As such, a recent budget memo from the board outlines potential areas of reduction totaling more than $600,000. These include staffing changes, service reductions and reductions in supplies.
We think that after all is said and done, the board may not have to close any school. But that could mean negative impacts on student learning where it counts the most – in the classroom.
Lyonel Doherty, editor
