The following appeared in the August 11, 2008, edition of the Herald:
News media, as well as trustees on the Okanagan–Skaha school board, have asked where the opposition to the proposed demolition of the Penticton Secondary School gym and auditorium been for the last 2 ½ to four years. Well I will tell you: It has been loud and clear but ignored by the board.
Four years ago I heard Pen Hi was to be replaced and the old school was falling apart, according to the board. So I went on a tour of the school and found, on the contrary, very serviceable structures, especially when looking at the gym and auditorium. In August 2004 I went to see the secretary treasurer of the school board inquiring if there had been any thought to saving valuable assets like the gym and auditorium. He was less than cordial when I asked to see the proposed plans and contemptuous when my suggestion of keeping these buildings was suggested. He told me the bu8ldings were expensive to maintain, in terrible condition and would be torn down.
I was very surprised that a public-officials had such little respect for citizens and certainly left with the impression that he did not want those buildings to remain no matter what. So, I know for a fact there was opposition to the demolition plans at least since August 200r since I voiced it personally.
Many citizens from all ages and backgrounds including teachers, students, seniors, business people and parents put their signatures to a petition asking for a delay in the demolition. Countless letters have been written by Pen Hi alumni, artists performing in the auditorium and Penticton citizens. Most recently taxpayers petitioned the courts asking for a postponement of the demolition. There has been and there still is opposition to the loss of the gym and auditorium. The school board has just neglected to listen.
Some people have remained silent on this issue publicly because they are afraid of retaliation by the board. This is understandable particularly when you see the vindictive way they have replied to the ordinary citizens that dared question their demolition plans in court. They have actually said they are considering asking these people to pay for the board’s court costs. That is a significant sum since the board did not hesitate in hiring a very expensive Vancouver lawyer to prepare their case with your tax dollars.
This school board has been manipulative and untruthful in carrying out its Pen-Hi re-development plan. They have excluded taxpayers. City council has supported the board’s tactics and plans, providing their own lawyer to accompany the board for three days in court in Kelowna. The council is also clearly supporting the South Okanagan Performing Arts Centre by buying property and hiring consultants. So how can the city make an impartial evaluation of the gym and auditorium when they believe their retention conflicts with their SOPAC plans?
Opposition is growing as more people realize what will be lost, excellent public facilities which would take millions to replace. Listen to the public. They have some excellent ideas for using these buildings. Why not incorporate them with the Shatford building which was saved for $4million but without a designated purpose? This heritage building, along with the gym and auditorium, would make a practical and affordable core for community arts and sports activities. City council may not be able to afford a replacement for these buildings for some time since the South Okanagan Events Centre is currently more than $20 million over budget. The gym is a safe place for kids to play and stay healthy after school, providing an alternative to just hanging out around town somewhere. If extra school parking is urgently needed, then tear down the far less valuable Learning Centre and Alternate School and move their services to the empty Shatford building.
The city concil and the school board have acted as if they hold unlimited power and are not answerable to the public. The gym and auditorium should not be demolished at this time. There is opposition, loud and clear. Just wait until the next election.
Showing posts with label SD67. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SD67. Show all posts
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Zorka Kvestich: School board ignored electorate
The following appeared in the 24 July, 2008, edition of the Herald:
The School Board has not been fair. It thinks that two small meetings and a website was enough notification to tell the people about the new Pen High development and the demolition of the old school. Many people in Penticton are like me, retired, and do not use a computer. We expected our public officials to have our best interests in mind. However, it seems like the Board did not really want to hear from people like me, but we are taxpayers and want a say in assets that we believe are economical and can give many more years of valuable contribution to our community. The taxpayers should have a say on what happens to the north gym and auditorium. The Board has not accepted any suggestions that might include saving these buildings. They have not listened to the people that elected them. They are trying to destroy these structures in September just two months before the next civic election to avoid discussion and a possible referendum which would allow the majority to decide whether the buildings should be kept or not. The Board is actually asking a court to ignore the significant public opposition and allow the demolition of these buildings. This is unbelievable.
The taxpayers of town, many of whom are pensioners like myself, are already paying additional taxes because of the new South Okanagan Events Centre. I supported a referendum for this project after listening to the significant public discussion surrounding the proposal. A few years earlier, a plan to demolish the Memorial Arena was squashed by public input and the building was saved. The old arena is still giving excellent service to Penticton.
The Pen High development did not follow a similar excellent opportunity for public discussion. In fact, it actually appeared to be the opposite, with the School Board only informing the town what it was planning to do. The articles in the paper certainly suggested to me that the final choice about the gym and auditorium had already been made. I do not understand why two expensive buildings that we already own, with a small amount of renovation, cannot be utilized. It is the practical and economical solution to give our city much needed recreational and artistic venues. New facilities can be built later, with public support when the opportunity and funding is available.
I have attended scores of concerts in the auditorium while a member of the Okanagan Symphony and Community Concert Series. I watched my daughters during high school and now grand daughters playing basketball through the Penticton Basketball Camp in the gymnasium. I do not support destroying these facilities to make room for the parking lot of the new school. A new place can be found for parking, but these buildings cannot be easily replaced. I think that the Board has not represented the taxpayer’s best interests at all and should be held accountable in the next election. It is obligated to listen to the public and consider the practical alternatives that have been repeatedly made by concerned citizens and suffering taxpayers.
The School Board has not been fair. It thinks that two small meetings and a website was enough notification to tell the people about the new Pen High development and the demolition of the old school. Many people in Penticton are like me, retired, and do not use a computer. We expected our public officials to have our best interests in mind. However, it seems like the Board did not really want to hear from people like me, but we are taxpayers and want a say in assets that we believe are economical and can give many more years of valuable contribution to our community. The taxpayers should have a say on what happens to the north gym and auditorium. The Board has not accepted any suggestions that might include saving these buildings. They have not listened to the people that elected them. They are trying to destroy these structures in September just two months before the next civic election to avoid discussion and a possible referendum which would allow the majority to decide whether the buildings should be kept or not. The Board is actually asking a court to ignore the significant public opposition and allow the demolition of these buildings. This is unbelievable.
The taxpayers of town, many of whom are pensioners like myself, are already paying additional taxes because of the new South Okanagan Events Centre. I supported a referendum for this project after listening to the significant public discussion surrounding the proposal. A few years earlier, a plan to demolish the Memorial Arena was squashed by public input and the building was saved. The old arena is still giving excellent service to Penticton.
The Pen High development did not follow a similar excellent opportunity for public discussion. In fact, it actually appeared to be the opposite, with the School Board only informing the town what it was planning to do. The articles in the paper certainly suggested to me that the final choice about the gym and auditorium had already been made. I do not understand why two expensive buildings that we already own, with a small amount of renovation, cannot be utilized. It is the practical and economical solution to give our city much needed recreational and artistic venues. New facilities can be built later, with public support when the opportunity and funding is available.
I have attended scores of concerts in the auditorium while a member of the Okanagan Symphony and Community Concert Series. I watched my daughters during high school and now grand daughters playing basketball through the Penticton Basketball Camp in the gymnasium. I do not support destroying these facilities to make room for the parking lot of the new school. A new place can be found for parking, but these buildings cannot be easily replaced. I think that the Board has not represented the taxpayer’s best interests at all and should be held accountable in the next election. It is obligated to listen to the public and consider the practical alternatives that have been repeatedly made by concerned citizens and suffering taxpayers.
News: Judgment from BC Supreme Court
The ruling from Mr. Justice Barrow dismissing our petition against School District 67 can be found on the web at: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/Jdb-txt/SC/08/09/2008BCSC0980.htm.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Legal challenge to SD67
Summary of legal documents filed June 12, 2008
Affidavits
- David Perry was on Council since 1990 and Mayor from 2002 to 2005 - David explains the community need for both facilities and the lack of public or formal meetings as well as the history of SONG & PLEASE - he and all the other living Mayors agree both buildings should be kept until replacements are ready for use
- Tom Siddon draws on his Parliamentary experience and engineering background to explain the need, plus the fine acoustic quality of the auditorium - Tom details the numerous requests/attempts to save the buildings and the process that lead up to the June 5/08 decision to file the Petition
- Sandra Congram focuses on the need for the gym in today's world where fitness facilities are at a premium; she also talks of her presentations to keep the facilities and that now is not the time to tear down functional facilities when the need is so great
- Marylin Cleland Barnay focuses on the need for the auditorium and the need for a Performing Arts Facility Plan that meets projected community needs; she is also critical of the Board for not allowing public input
- Adeline Rheaume reveals the overwhelming public support in favor of keeping the facilities as- 97% - 2671 to 85 and how the Board process on May 20/08 was a farce including the absent trustee, Kevin Andrews, saying his "nay" vote from Cuba!
- Ron Mason identifies the cost of up to $1.2M to bring the buildings up to standard; that the Board's plan to the Ministry did not include either facility; and that the asbestos can be effectively dealt with
- Al Kenyon confirms the "Six Mayors" support & cautions that the City & Board are taking a real gamble by demolishing before replacements are ready; Al also comments on the City apparently deliberately creating a facility deficit as the City seems to think it will have a better chance raising the $30M it needs for the new performing arts center, if the auditorium is down
- Dodi Morrison explains her opposition to the demolition and the lack of public consultation
- Dave Shunter highlights his lengthy experience as an educator and trustee and that the auditorium and gym were never part of the Board's plan; when he left the Board at the end of 2005, he thought the City would be taking over the facilities
- Keith Lindstrom another long time educator and trustee explains that even his own plan was not considered, even though he was a trustee at the time; he also confirms that "the plan" was to "knock 'em down" from the beginning. Keith says there was no public meeting where the final design proposal was presented
- Michael Brydon the professor, focuses on the numbers and Michael Brydon, the dad, focuses on the need. The $1,142,000 Greyback estimate, his paper "Saving the Former Pen-Hi Gymnasium and Auditorium: A Decision Analysis", and his Cost Assessment of SOPAC are filed with the Court
- Beth Campbell reinforces that she and former Mayors Messmer, Tinning, Pearce, Kenyon and Perry have all had decades of public service and they unanimously agree, despite the fact their politics are different, that the buildings should stay
- Cory Goodrich, an articling student at Johnston, Johnson & Company, reviewed all the School Board Minutes and other public documents and confirms the dates set out in the Petition
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Update: SONG meets with the school board
A handful of SONG members met with the SD67 school board on Monday, May 14th, 2007, to present a case for saving the Pen-Hi auditorium and gym. An account of the meeting appeared in the Western News:
Plea to save Pen High buildings unlikely to sway board
By KATHY MICHAELS
Western News Staff
May 16 2007
A thorough list of why and how Penticton Secondary’s north gym and auditorium should remain in the community was presented to the school board on Monday, but to-date the district still intends to move ahead with their demolition plans.
About a dozen supporters of keeping the buildings intact filed into the Okanagan Skaha board meeting to plead their case to trustees, and they came armed with a litany of support letters, a petition 600 signatures strong in addition to some empirical evidence for keeping the structures up and running.
Dr. Sandy Congram addressed the board and outlined the group dubbed Save Our North Gym and Auditorium’s proposal. Leaving ownership of the facilities in the hands of the district, Congram proposed that the city lease and manage the recreational space and mirror what is being done successfully in several other communities throughout the province. According to Congram, both facilities are intrinsic parts of the community and, at this juncture, it would be imprudent to remove them, especially when it’s clear they won’t be replaced now that funds are tied up by projects like the South Okanagan Event Centre.
One of the key aspects of the groups proposal was a financial analysis by Greyback Construction Ltd. and Ron Mason. According to the evaluation, everything from maintenance, to upgrades of the building would tally up to approximately $1.14 million.
Noting that the funds needed for the project are minor in comparison to what would be needed to re-build the facilities, Congram said initial planning meetings that were held three years ago didn’t reflect the issues that are present today. “This is a matter of political will and looking at what we will need in the community,” she said. “It’s wasteful to tear the buildings down — we need them.”
Although trustees and district staff listened attentively during Congram’s presentation, school board chair Larry Little didn’t move from their original assertions. However, because of community interest Little said the district will take another look at the options. “We are still firm that it doesn’t suit our educational purposes, but we are going to explore some site options,” said Little.
Little highlighted four non-negotiable items that the district will keep mindful of if the city does decide to support SONG’s proposal for funding. “We need to maintain student safety, a bus in and out area, green space and adequate parking,” he said. Little also said that it was re-assuring to have contact with the group. Referring to the Greyback Construction cost analysis Little said the information will be taken seriously. “It’s a good document, there’s some substantial information in there,” he said, adding that the district is still waiting from a decision from the city.
Plea to save Pen High buildings unlikely to sway board
By KATHY MICHAELS
Western News Staff
May 16 2007
A thorough list of why and how Penticton Secondary’s north gym and auditorium should remain in the community was presented to the school board on Monday, but to-date the district still intends to move ahead with their demolition plans.
About a dozen supporters of keeping the buildings intact filed into the Okanagan Skaha board meeting to plead their case to trustees, and they came armed with a litany of support letters, a petition 600 signatures strong in addition to some empirical evidence for keeping the structures up and running.
Dr. Sandy Congram addressed the board and outlined the group dubbed Save Our North Gym and Auditorium’s proposal. Leaving ownership of the facilities in the hands of the district, Congram proposed that the city lease and manage the recreational space and mirror what is being done successfully in several other communities throughout the province. According to Congram, both facilities are intrinsic parts of the community and, at this juncture, it would be imprudent to remove them, especially when it’s clear they won’t be replaced now that funds are tied up by projects like the South Okanagan Event Centre.
One of the key aspects of the groups proposal was a financial analysis by Greyback Construction Ltd. and Ron Mason. According to the evaluation, everything from maintenance, to upgrades of the building would tally up to approximately $1.14 million.
Noting that the funds needed for the project are minor in comparison to what would be needed to re-build the facilities, Congram said initial planning meetings that were held three years ago didn’t reflect the issues that are present today. “This is a matter of political will and looking at what we will need in the community,” she said. “It’s wasteful to tear the buildings down — we need them.”
Although trustees and district staff listened attentively during Congram’s presentation, school board chair Larry Little didn’t move from their original assertions. However, because of community interest Little said the district will take another look at the options. “We are still firm that it doesn’t suit our educational purposes, but we are going to explore some site options,” said Little.
Little highlighted four non-negotiable items that the district will keep mindful of if the city does decide to support SONG’s proposal for funding. “We need to maintain student safety, a bus in and out area, green space and adequate parking,” he said. Little also said that it was re-assuring to have contact with the group. Referring to the Greyback Construction cost analysis Little said the information will be taken seriously. “It’s a good document, there’s some substantial information in there,” he said, adding that the district is still waiting from a decision from the city.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Michael Brydon: SONG's feasible and concrete plans
The following was submitted to the editor of The Herald on April 20, 2007, in response to comments made by the chair of the School District 67 board:
I also find Mr. Little’s statement insulting to those in this community who have volunteered their valuable time to come up with a better plan. Members of SONG have contacted individual school board trustees and alerted them to existence of grassroots support for saving both buildings. Trustees know about our website (saveournorthgym.blogspot.com) which outlines our proposal, summarizes news reports, lists supporting organizations (17 and counting), and provides a sample of recent letters critical of the decision to demolish the buildings. The concerns raised by Mr. Little in the April 19th story are also addressed on the website. For example, we report that several employees of the city’s parks and recreation department have told us straight-out that current demand for prime-time gym space in this town exceeds capacity.
We understand that the school district does not want (read: cannot afford) to save the existing gym and auditorium for its own use. However, the school board must understand that these surplus buildings—which, to clarify, belong to taxpayers, not the school board—are unique and valuable assets that we as citizen-owners may want to hang on to. Clearly, the school board has a limited educational mandate and may not always be able to contribute to our larger community goals. However, this does not give the board license to actively obstruct the efforts of the mayor and council (also democratically elected) in their efforts to achieve these goals.
We recognize that our proposal involves changes and these changes will be inconvenient to school planners at this late stage. We apologize for not submitting our proposal earlier; however many members of SONG have been busy working, raising our children and grandchildren, and attending to our lives. Fortunately, one school board trustee, Walter Huebert, has recently written some excellent articles about the rebellions in Upper and
Update: No feasible, concrete plans?
According School District 67 chair Larry Little, as quoted in an article on Page A4 of The Herald on 19 April, 2007, "In spite of the number of comments and concerns being raised, no person or group has come up with a feasible and concrete plan to save the [gym]."
Mr. Little goes on to deny that there is a shortage of gym space in Penticton: "While some letters to the board and local newspaper write about the need for having the additional gym space in the community, Little pointed out there is gym space in the currently available not being used. 'We have elementary school, we have another secondary school here in Princess Margaret and we also have middle schools,' he said. 'A lot of time these facilities are not being used, they're not utilized on a weekend...that space is available.' Little says the school board encourages those looking for space to phone the school district or check in with the community centre to inquire what facilities are available."
Mr. Little goes on to deny that there is a shortage of gym space in Penticton: "While some letters to the board and local newspaper write about the need for having the additional gym space in the community, Little pointed out there is gym space in the currently available not being used. 'We have elementary school, we have another secondary school here in Princess Margaret and we also have middle schools,' he said. 'A lot of time these facilities are not being used, they're not utilized on a weekend...that space is available.' Little says the school board encourages those looking for space to phone the school district or check in with the community centre to inquire what facilities are available."
My editorial comments:
First, it appears that Mr. Little has forgotten about the meeting with the City of Penticton in which the mayor expressed an interest in saving both buildings as community facilities (this meeting is also referenced in the the school board minutes—item 6)
Second, I cannot agree with Mr. Little's assertions about excess gym capacity. SONG members have consulted with several employees of the city's parks and recreation department and we have heard a consistent message: demand for the gym space exceeds capacity. Perhaps the source of the discrepancy between Mr. Little and those who actually schedule gym-based programs has arisen because the school board considers gym time and space to be fungible. That is, they assume that one hour in the Uplands Elementary School gym on a Sunday morning is interchangeable with one hour in the Pen-Hi gym on a Wednesday evening. As many have already pointed out, and I have argued in a previous posting, the Pen-Hi gym is a unique space. That it sits empty in non-prime-time hours is not really the point—time and place matter. The school buses that Mr. Little appears to hold in such high regard are also empty on Sunday mornings, but I do not see the school board sending all the "excess" buses to the crusher. Now that I think of it, the average utilization of our fire trucks seems low too...
In addition, the school board seems to think that demand occurs in a vacuum. It does not. Demand is a function of price, which is a function of supply. Increase the supply of gym space, make it easier for both the city's parks and rec department and community groups to schedule events, and demand that we never imagined will materialize (see induced demand). It is sort of like, "Build it and they will come." Except, in this case, it is already built.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Recent letters in the Herald and Okanagan Saturday
In a letter from Carl and Betty Harris, printed in The Okanagan Saturday, 14 April, 2007:
"[...] We can understand the operation of these facilities cannot be the responsibility of the school district, but we soon learned the decision to demolish [the gym] has already been made. The trustees intend to turn the gym into a loading and unloading area for school buses. In other words, a parking lot.
This facility was brought up to present standards just a few years ago. The city is already being asked for the use of such facilities for various groups, including those recently losing the Nanaimo Hall. Some of these groups even have some dollars and are simply looking for a reasonable deal. We can't believe a parking lot and new buildings is reasonable use of tax dollars.
Next up is the Pen-Hi auditorium. We thought this was a keeper until a new facility could be built. We have a group in this town that is promoting a new performing arts facility. Surely they would support keeping the auditorium until a new one is built. Wrong. Perhaps their feeling is that a hole in the ground would greatly help their demand to raise the $33 million for their recommended facility.
[...] What can you do? Sign the petition and become a little more vocal as a taxpayer."
A letter from Kevin Hanson, head coach of the UBC (Vancouver) men's basketball team, was printed in the April 17, 2007, edition of The Herald.
"I cannot put enough emphasis on the value of the facility you already have. There is a vast difference between adding to what you have versus replacing what you have. You have a unique opportunity to build on something good and make it great. After all, your students and your community are worth the investment."
"[...] We can understand the operation of these facilities cannot be the responsibility of the school district, but we soon learned the decision to demolish [the gym] has already been made. The trustees intend to turn the gym into a loading and unloading area for school buses. In other words, a parking lot.
This facility was brought up to present standards just a few years ago. The city is already being asked for the use of such facilities for various groups, including those recently losing the Nanaimo Hall. Some of these groups even have some dollars and are simply looking for a reasonable deal. We can't believe a parking lot and new buildings is reasonable use of tax dollars.
Next up is the Pen-Hi auditorium. We thought this was a keeper until a new facility could be built. We have a group in this town that is promoting a new performing arts facility. Surely they would support keeping the auditorium until a new one is built. Wrong. Perhaps their feeling is that a hole in the ground would greatly help their demand to raise the $33 million for their recommended facility.
[...] What can you do? Sign the petition and become a little more vocal as a taxpayer."
A letter from Kevin Hanson, head coach of the UBC (Vancouver) men's basketball team, was printed in the April 17, 2007, edition of The Herald.
"I cannot put enough emphasis on the value of the facility you already have. There is a vast difference between adding to what you have versus replacing what you have. You have a unique opportunity to build on something good and make it great. After all, your students and your community are worth the investment."
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Fred Fedorak: Letter to School District 67 Trustees
The following letter was sent to the trustees for School District 67. It was also reprinted in the Herald on 11 April, 2007.
Dear School District No. 67 Trustee,
I was very disappointed to learn that the School Board, although extending the deadline for a plan to save the auditorium, is not interested at all in the future of the Pen Hi gymnasium. Why bring forth a deadline to save one and not the other?
I am requesting the Board reconsider this decision and take a very serious look at how the loss of the gym will impact the community. Please consider the community as a whole on this matter and not just the position of the School District. Local residents pay taxes that go into school, as well as municipal, coffers. So in a sense the community has a vested interest in those buildings.
I am well aware of the Board’s decision to provide an excellent double sized new gym complete with weight room and in accordance with the Ministry of Education regulations. You are to be commended for your decision and the numerous hours that you have spent going over the plans for the new facility. However, this new gym is primarily for student use. The community in all probability will not have access to this facility because during the winter months it is fully scheduled for student activities. At the present time I understand that the Community Centre gym is overused during this same high season period. As a result of the planned demolitions, the community as a whole will be hard pressed to provide spaces for recreational activities and performing arts.
I believe that with some creativity the parking and bus loading areas can be reconfigured to accommodate your safety concerns. Where there is a will there is a way! We are not studying buildings that are past their usefulness and ready for the landfill, as they have several years of productive use left in them.
Project to the future and visualize the negative impact that the demolition of these two buildings will have on the community of Penticton. Visualize also the positive impact for the local citizens by turning them over to the City of Penticton to operate. With the present financial situation of City Council I cannot see enough funds being made available for the replacement of the aforesaid facilities in the next decade. We really won’t know what we have lost until these buildings have disappeared.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Fedorak
Dear School District No. 67 Trustee,
I was very disappointed to learn that the School Board, although extending the deadline for a plan to save the auditorium, is not interested at all in the future of the Pen Hi gymnasium. Why bring forth a deadline to save one and not the other?
I am requesting the Board reconsider this decision and take a very serious look at how the loss of the gym will impact the community. Please consider the community as a whole on this matter and not just the position of the School District. Local residents pay taxes that go into school, as well as municipal, coffers. So in a sense the community has a vested interest in those buildings.
I am well aware of the Board’s decision to provide an excellent double sized new gym complete with weight room and in accordance with the Ministry of Education regulations. You are to be commended for your decision and the numerous hours that you have spent going over the plans for the new facility. However, this new gym is primarily for student use. The community in all probability will not have access to this facility because during the winter months it is fully scheduled for student activities. At the present time I understand that the Community Centre gym is overused during this same high season period. As a result of the planned demolitions, the community as a whole will be hard pressed to provide spaces for recreational activities and performing arts.
I believe that with some creativity the parking and bus loading areas can be reconfigured to accommodate your safety concerns. Where there is a will there is a way! We are not studying buildings that are past their usefulness and ready for the landfill, as they have several years of productive use left in them.
Project to the future and visualize the negative impact that the demolition of these two buildings will have on the community of Penticton. Visualize also the positive impact for the local citizens by turning them over to the City of Penticton to operate. With the present financial situation of City Council I cannot see enough funds being made available for the replacement of the aforesaid facilities in the next decade. We really won’t know what we have lost until these buildings have disappeared.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Fedorak
Monday, March 19, 2007
Update: The taxpayer's left hand slaps its right hand?
There was a short news article on Page A3 of the Herald (19 March, 2007):
"City council has decided to use the time between now and the school district's June 1 deadline for a decision on the Penticton Secondary School auditorium to conduct a facilities inventory [...] In a prepared statement, Mayor Jake Kimberley said the city would look into the cost of taking over the auditorium. He added that the city had heard 'loud and clear' there are differing priorities, which include not only a performing arts centre but expanding the swimming pool."
I found the omission of the gym in this story odd, since the city had said it was considering both buildings. The story in Western provides some additional information, including a telling quote from the school board chair:
"Okanagan-Skaha school board trustees this week gave the city until June 1 to decide whether it wants to submit a proposal to run the Pen High auditorium as a stand-alone facility. The original deadline was March 31.
The city also expressed interested in taking over the north gym, but that option is now off the table, said Larry Little, chairman.
While the auditorium has overshadowed the north gym, its fate has generated considerable attention in recent weeks, with several citizens calling for its preservation.
'It (the north gym) is still our property and it is still our decision,' he said, noting that the new Pen High school now under construction will include more recreational space."
"City council has decided to use the time between now and the school district's June 1 deadline for a decision on the Penticton Secondary School auditorium to conduct a facilities inventory [...] In a prepared statement, Mayor Jake Kimberley said the city would look into the cost of taking over the auditorium. He added that the city had heard 'loud and clear' there are differing priorities, which include not only a performing arts centre but expanding the swimming pool."
I found the omission of the gym in this story odd, since the city had said it was considering both buildings. The story in Western provides some additional information, including a telling quote from the school board chair:
"Okanagan-Skaha school board trustees this week gave the city until June 1 to decide whether it wants to submit a proposal to run the Pen High auditorium as a stand-alone facility. The original deadline was March 31.
The city also expressed interested in taking over the north gym, but that option is now off the table, said Larry Little, chairman.
While the auditorium has overshadowed the north gym, its fate has generated considerable attention in recent weeks, with several citizens calling for its preservation.
'It (the north gym) is still our property and it is still our decision,' he said, noting that the new Pen High school now under construction will include more recreational space."
My editorial comments:
I think it is important to address Mr. Little's misapprehension head on: It is clearly not his gym. Nor is it the school district's gym or the Ministry of Education's gym. It is our gym. We, as taxpayers, employ various people to look after our gym, but this does not mean these employees have ultimate authority. It is like the driver of a city bus saying, 'This is my bus'. Yes we delegate enormous responsibility and decision autonomy to the drivers of our buses. But we do not grant them the power to veto all decisions made regarding the use and disposition of "their" buses. Nor should the school board grant itself a veto and presume to know that taxpayers would prefer, say, a parking lot to a community gymnasium.
The SOAP proposal essentially involves transfer of our gym from the administrative oversight of one body of elected officials (the school board) to the administrative oversight of a different body of elected officials (city council). Contrary to Mr. Little's assertion, no real change of ownership is involved. I think the school board should keep this in mind.
Of course, we recognize that the school board has a mandate to ensure the new school works. Fair enough. However, this does not mean that the school board should act contrary to the interests of the community in seeking to fulfill its mandate. The new Pen-Hi, after all, is part of the community. As Mayor Kimberley points out, we have finite resources. We cannot afford to have the left hand of the taxpayer working to spite its right hand.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Update: School board grants extension until June 1st
From Page A3 of the Herald (16 March, 2007):
"The Okanagan Skaha school board is giving the city until June 1 to complete its investigation of costs involved in saving the Pen-Hi auditorium, but remains firm in its plans to tear down the school's gymnasium [...] Little said the board agreed to extend its previous March 31 deadline, but only for the city to look into preserving the auditorium.
[...] If the north gym is preserved, Ministry of Education guidelines call for the floor space of the new gymnasium to be decreased accordingly.
The north gym site of Eckhardt Avenue is seen as critical for a bus entrance to the new school parking lot, as well as a green space and a 'safe zone' for students in the area."
"The Okanagan Skaha school board is giving the city until June 1 to complete its investigation of costs involved in saving the Pen-Hi auditorium, but remains firm in its plans to tear down the school's gymnasium [...] Little said the board agreed to extend its previous March 31 deadline, but only for the city to look into preserving the auditorium.
[...] If the north gym is preserved, Ministry of Education guidelines call for the floor space of the new gymnasium to be decreased accordingly.
The north gym site of Eckhardt Avenue is seen as critical for a bus entrance to the new school parking lot, as well as a green space and a 'safe zone' for students in the area."
My editorial comments:
The objective of SOAP is for the City of Penticton to take over both the Pen-Hi auditorium and north gym for community use. In return, the school district may be compensated with money or a land swap. Or perhaps they will simply be asked to do without a green space and safe zone. These are implementation details. Naturally, if the taxpayers of Penticton are on the hook for the "fair market value" of the land in question, we should expect the proceeds of the sale to benefit the school district. Thus, funds requested of taxpayers in School District 67 should be reduced accordingly.
I personally find Mr. Little's assertions regarding what the school district will and will not allow a bit troubling. Why would the school board (which is elected by citizens of the community to serve citizens of the community) stand in the way of another elected body (the municipal government) if that government wants to act on behalf of the community and make a proposal regarding the gymnasium? I understand that the school board has its mandate and that mandate is different from that of the municipal government. But let's not lose sight of the fact that there is only one set of interests that matter here, and they are the broad interests of the community as a whole. One group of taxpayers pays the bills for both the school district and the city.
As for the oft-repeated threat that Pen-Hi will lose gym space if the north gym is saved, this would only be the case if the school district retained the gym for its own use. (Plus, this might be a more convincing threat if the foundation for the new school was not already in place.) Since the proposal currently being investigated by the city specifies community, rather than school ownership of the facilities, I am not sure why Mr. Little keeps bringing this up. We get it: The school board does not want the gym and auditorium for school use (despite what all the folks who actually teach at Pen-Hi are saying). More importantly, we get the underlying message that the school board has no money to contribute to saving the buildings. But it is the school board's turn to get our message: The community wants the gym and auditorium for community use.
Finally, there is the issue of the "green space" and "safe zones". These terms are much more attractive than "parking lot", so I see why they have been inserted into the discourse by the school board chair. Knocking down good buildings to make room for a parking lot sounds scandalous; but who can argue with green space and safe zones for bus unloading? I, for one, am a bit skeptical. Green space and safe zones sound like nice things, but I am not sure they are "critical", as Mr. Little asserts. We are talking about Pen-Hi here, not an elementary school. If these students are so vulnerable to traffic, how come they seem to have no problem skipping across Main Street every day at lunch? And let's face it, a green zone that is on school property (and hence unusable by smokers) might as well be a parking lot. Indeed, the mass exodus across Main Street every day at noon would be much less massive if the existing green space in front of the Shatford and Ellis buildings was highly valued by students.
Ultimately, we as taxpayers and citizens have to recognize the nature of this alleged trade-off: Do we want safe zone and green space for our kids (young adults, really) or do we want a gym and auditorium for everyone? Or can we have both? Clearly, saving these two large buildings is going to create challenges for the designers of the new Pen-Hi. However, as taxpayers, we should expect these challenges to be addressed with some creativity and resourcefulness. In my view, repackaging a parking lot as a safe zone falls short of the standard.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Update: City asks school board for extension
From Page A3 of the Herald (14 March, 2007):
"The City of Penticton has asked for an extension for the March 31st deadline hovering over the fate of the Pen-Hi auditorium. Mayor Jake Kimberley and city staff met with Okanagan Skaha school board chair Larry Little, School District 67 staff and performing arts community representatives in closed-door sessions at City Hall on Tuesday.
[...] Kimberley said preliminary estimates for adding a separate heating and air conditioning system for the auditorium, along with washrooms and other improvements could total about $1.5 million. The city is also looking into whether the adjacent north gym could also be saved and operated as a community facility. The mayor suggested additional costs for taking over the gym could be minimal."
Betty Clark, president of the Penticton branch of the Okanagan Symphony Society was also quoted in the story:
"Clark suggested by saving the auditorium, even on a temporary basis, it would allow more time to properly plan for a new performing arts centre in Penticton. 'We can't put all our eggs in to sports venues,' she said. [...] Clark said the symphony has been unable to book most of its performances in the 730-seat Pen-Hi auditorium due to its use by school drama classes." (see also Marylin Cleland Barnay's comments on this issue).
"The City of Penticton has asked for an extension for the March 31st deadline hovering over the fate of the Pen-Hi auditorium. Mayor Jake Kimberley and city staff met with Okanagan Skaha school board chair Larry Little, School District 67 staff and performing arts community representatives in closed-door sessions at City Hall on Tuesday.
[...] Kimberley said preliminary estimates for adding a separate heating and air conditioning system for the auditorium, along with washrooms and other improvements could total about $1.5 million. The city is also looking into whether the adjacent north gym could also be saved and operated as a community facility. The mayor suggested additional costs for taking over the gym could be minimal."
Betty Clark, president of the Penticton branch of the Okanagan Symphony Society was also quoted in the story:
"Clark suggested by saving the auditorium, even on a temporary basis, it would allow more time to properly plan for a new performing arts centre in Penticton. 'We can't put all our eggs in to sports venues,' she said. [...] Clark said the symphony has been unable to book most of its performances in the 730-seat Pen-Hi auditorium due to its use by school drama classes." (see also Marylin Cleland Barnay's comments on this issue).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)