The following appeared in the August 05, 2008 edition of the Western News:
The Okanagan Skaha school board must be very satisfied with themselves, now that the courts have upheld their decision to demolish the gym and auditorium at Penticton Secondary School.
Once again, the concept of might makes right comes to the fore. The problem I have with this is: how can anyone who was elected on, and purports to believe in, democratic principles, in clear conscience, even entertain such an attitude?
If the contract has been let and the ultimate end is near, what would happen if a challenge to the court decision were made and the destruction had already started? I shudder to think. Would, or for that matter could, restoration be made? Scary thoughts, don’t you think.
It may seem too late for salvation. That is, only if you believe it is. If you are a “preservationist keener,” get off your duff and make your sentiment known. Flood the school board office with calls. Light up the switchboard. Get focus groups and protest at the board office. Make you sentiment known.
Don’t just sit in the wings and complain while taking no action to rectify things. Urge the protest group to appeal the decision of the judge. Be proactive and, if need be, reactive. Don’t just stand there, do something if you’re a believer in cultural values and history. I, for one, have no interest in city fathers pursuing a white elephant arts and entertainment centre that we can ill afford, irrespective of the far-fetched promises our elected pundits seem to make saying that it will be funded by governments and casino funds and corporate sponsors.
I wish to inform the city fathers that not everyone just fell off of the turnip truck.
The far-reaching consequences will be felt by our kids, and our kids’ kids for our illustrious events centre. True, it will be here long after your terms have ended, for the most part. You can always look back and say, as new administrations bring in policy, we’re not responsible for that. That’s what new administrations can say about your faux pas.
From my perspective, I see two choices for us as concerned taxpayers. The first is to bury our heads in the sand like the proverbial ostrich and pretend that whatever happens won’t really affect our daily lives now or in the future. The second is that we can stand and be counted by supporting a call for an appeal and hopefully achieve the desired result of preservation or a re-think on the board’s part. After all, it is our tax dollars that they are playing this game with.
Bottom line is this — if you are content to sit on the fence, the fence will fall. If you are prepared to bolster the fence, it will stand. Stand and be counted if you believe in the school preservation. Do it now, whatever you can. I am.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Dan Ebenal: Group’s efforts destined to fail
The following editorial appeared in the 29 July, 2008, edition of the Western News:
The saga around the proposed salvation of two aging school buildings is threatening to become a never-ending story.
The Penticton League of Sensible Electors has — despite suffering a legal defeat last week — promised to carry on their good fight to save the Penticton Secondary School auditorium and north gym from demolition is planning to announce their next move this week.
What might this move look like when the group has already used up its most powerful option is beyond us.
Might this group announce that they would tie themselves to building in a courageous, even tragically heroic bid to keep the buildings upright? Or will they call for a mass demonstration or some other form of political action? They have already raised the spectre of running a slate in the next municipal election. Or will they look for help from outside the community, say provincial leaders, assuming that these individuals actually care about this matter? We are certainly open for surprises.
But it is highly unlikely that any measure announced this Friday will succeed. The actual facts on the ground are clear and will deny PLEASE any possibility of success, no matter how they define it. The group is of course, free to pursue their goal and persist in their efforts, something it has done with determination, since it continues to ignore appeals from this space and other voices to cease their futile and ultimately doomed campaign.
The points made in favour of saving the two facilities might have resonated two, three years ago. Yes, the group has inspired thousands of people to voice their opinion in recent weeks, but this out pouring comes too late.
So PLEASE, end this pointless agony and stop assuming that the powers that be can be forced into sharing your rose-coloured nostalgia for two buildings whose best days are long behind them.
The saga around the proposed salvation of two aging school buildings is threatening to become a never-ending story.
The Penticton League of Sensible Electors has — despite suffering a legal defeat last week — promised to carry on their good fight to save the Penticton Secondary School auditorium and north gym from demolition is planning to announce their next move this week.
What might this move look like when the group has already used up its most powerful option is beyond us.
Might this group announce that they would tie themselves to building in a courageous, even tragically heroic bid to keep the buildings upright? Or will they call for a mass demonstration or some other form of political action? They have already raised the spectre of running a slate in the next municipal election. Or will they look for help from outside the community, say provincial leaders, assuming that these individuals actually care about this matter? We are certainly open for surprises.
But it is highly unlikely that any measure announced this Friday will succeed. The actual facts on the ground are clear and will deny PLEASE any possibility of success, no matter how they define it. The group is of course, free to pursue their goal and persist in their efforts, something it has done with determination, since it continues to ignore appeals from this space and other voices to cease their futile and ultimately doomed campaign.
The points made in favour of saving the two facilities might have resonated two, three years ago. Yes, the group has inspired thousands of people to voice their opinion in recent weeks, but this out pouring comes too late.
Editorial aside: Two or three years ago the South Okanagan Events Centre was not on the books. Now it is, and the City of Penticton is at least $20 million (I suspect closer to $40 million) poorer. Call me crazy, but I think this is relevant.
So PLEASE, end this pointless agony and stop assuming that the powers that be can be forced into sharing your rose-coloured nostalgia for two buildings whose best days are long behind them.
I assume that Mr. Ebenal has come up with a plan to fund the replacement for the aging Pen-Hi auditorium: "The Penticton Western News Centre for the Performing Arts". Now all we need from Mr. Ebenal is a cheque for $40 million...
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.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Adeline Rheaume: Court injunction for buildings necessary step
The following letter appeared in the July 15th Western News. A slightly different version also appeared in the Herald:
Why is it necessary for taxpayers of this area to take such extraordinary steps as asking for a court injunction to stop the destruction of the Pen Hi gym and auditorium?
It’s because we have such an extraordinary situation here, with tens of millions of dollars worth of valuable assets in danger of being hauled to the landfill. (And then we might well be forced into the position of replacing them.) All this with the distinct possibility of an economic “correction” facing us.
There is very strong evidence that an overwhelming majority of Penticton and area residents (approximately 97 per cent) do not want this to happen.
Yet our six school trustees, who speak with one strangely identical voice, plus five of our city council (everyone except Vassilaki and Ashton) have decided to ignore the usual democratic process and act against the wishes of this vast majority.
If they challenge these statements, we challenge them (if they cannot see fit to call a referendum) to sit down and carry out another opinion survey. With us.
When we conducted our survey, with every age group from high school to senior participating, over 2,600 said do not do it.
Only 85 said yes. If they can come up with that many people agreeing to the destruction of these facilities, I’m sure some of us would be willing to autograph the wrecking ball. That’s how confident we are the people of this area are completely against this insanity.
So what we have here is a handful of elected people who have forgotten that they represent us, the electorate. When there is such a huge disconnect between their thinking and what the general public wants, its time they did some soul searching. Especially when they are embarking upon something totally irreversible.
Working together, the city, school board and the South Okanagan Performing Arts Facility Society could have made this work on behalf of the community, serving both adults and students for decades to come. They chose not to.
That is when we began hearing, “PLEASE. Something has to be done.”
Remember. There are no grants or funding of any kind. Just people digging into their own pockets because they do not want to see pieces of Penticton destroyed and the city thrown into unnecessary debt.
And now on the lighter side. Overheard in Kelowna: “Good thing Penticton officials were not in charge of the new bridge. They would have taken it down first then started figuring out how to replace it.”
Why is it necessary for taxpayers of this area to take such extraordinary steps as asking for a court injunction to stop the destruction of the Pen Hi gym and auditorium?
It’s because we have such an extraordinary situation here, with tens of millions of dollars worth of valuable assets in danger of being hauled to the landfill. (And then we might well be forced into the position of replacing them.) All this with the distinct possibility of an economic “correction” facing us.
There is very strong evidence that an overwhelming majority of Penticton and area residents (approximately 97 per cent) do not want this to happen.
Yet our six school trustees, who speak with one strangely identical voice, plus five of our city council (everyone except Vassilaki and Ashton) have decided to ignore the usual democratic process and act against the wishes of this vast majority.
If they challenge these statements, we challenge them (if they cannot see fit to call a referendum) to sit down and carry out another opinion survey. With us.
When we conducted our survey, with every age group from high school to senior participating, over 2,600 said do not do it.
Only 85 said yes. If they can come up with that many people agreeing to the destruction of these facilities, I’m sure some of us would be willing to autograph the wrecking ball. That’s how confident we are the people of this area are completely against this insanity.
So what we have here is a handful of elected people who have forgotten that they represent us, the electorate. When there is such a huge disconnect between their thinking and what the general public wants, its time they did some soul searching. Especially when they are embarking upon something totally irreversible.
Working together, the city, school board and the South Okanagan Performing Arts Facility Society could have made this work on behalf of the community, serving both adults and students for decades to come. They chose not to.
That is when we began hearing, “PLEASE. Something has to be done.”
Remember. There are no grants or funding of any kind. Just people digging into their own pockets because they do not want to see pieces of Penticton destroyed and the city thrown into unnecessary debt.
And now on the lighter side. Overheard in Kelowna: “Good thing Penticton officials were not in charge of the new bridge. They would have taken it down first then started figuring out how to replace it.”
Friday, July 18, 2008
News: Pen High battle lands in Supreme Court
The following appeard in the Western News:
By Steve Kidd - Penticton Western News
Published: July 17, 2008 10:00 AM
Updated: July 17, 2008 6:34 PM
The Penticton League of Sensible Electors and School District 67 finally have something in common.
They’re both going to have to wait a little bit longer to find out if a B.C. Supreme Court judge will grant an injunction delaying SD67’s plans to demolish the auditorium and north gym at Penticton Secondary along with the rest of the old school buildings.
After two days at Supreme Court in Kelowna receiving affidavits and hearing arguments from both sides in the ongoing dispute over the future of the Pen High buildings, Justice Geoffrey Barrow reserved decision on the matter, saying he would render a verbal opinion on July 22.
The court proceedings were started by PLEASE after they felt they had exhausted all other means to convince the Board of Education that, separated from the school, the gym and auditorium could still be valuable assets to the community.
One of the main arguments presented to Barrow concerned whether the school board had done due diligence in terms of allowing for public input over the future of the building.
PLEASE lawyer Tom Johnston presented the argument that while there had been public consultation over the planning of the new school, the board of education had not fulfilled obligations for public input regarding the disposition of surplus buildings.
“When assets are built that have a larger public value, they have a responsibility to consult with us,” said Tom Siddon, a PLEASE member, saying that SD67 should not just be responsible to the needs of students and the educational community but to the larger taxpaying public as well.
Given their chance to rebut, Geoffrey Litherland of Harris and Co. argued that during a process spanning several years, a great deal of public consultation had been done. He presented affidavits from superintendent Gary Doi, former board chair Connie Denesiuk, director of maintenance John Hickling and secretary-treasurer Frank Regehr, all of whom were heavily involved in the consultation process.
“It has been a five-year process. There’s been a lot of board work done” said Regehr, who felt they had provided Barrow with a well-researched package of information.
If the court approves their injunction on Tuesday, PLEASE chairman Dave Shunter said the group will begin work on a business plan and ways of raising the millions needed to preserve the old buildings. But if the judge doesn’t grant the injunction, he added, PLEASE won’t be giving up — they’ll just begin work on another plan.
“It isn’t over yet,” said Siddon.
“That’s my bottom line.”
By Steve Kidd - Penticton Western News
Published: July 17, 2008 10:00 AM
Updated: July 17, 2008 6:34 PM
The Penticton League of Sensible Electors and School District 67 finally have something in common.
They’re both going to have to wait a little bit longer to find out if a B.C. Supreme Court judge will grant an injunction delaying SD67’s plans to demolish the auditorium and north gym at Penticton Secondary along with the rest of the old school buildings.
After two days at Supreme Court in Kelowna receiving affidavits and hearing arguments from both sides in the ongoing dispute over the future of the Pen High buildings, Justice Geoffrey Barrow reserved decision on the matter, saying he would render a verbal opinion on July 22.
The court proceedings were started by PLEASE after they felt they had exhausted all other means to convince the Board of Education that, separated from the school, the gym and auditorium could still be valuable assets to the community.
One of the main arguments presented to Barrow concerned whether the school board had done due diligence in terms of allowing for public input over the future of the building.
PLEASE lawyer Tom Johnston presented the argument that while there had been public consultation over the planning of the new school, the board of education had not fulfilled obligations for public input regarding the disposition of surplus buildings.
“When assets are built that have a larger public value, they have a responsibility to consult with us,” said Tom Siddon, a PLEASE member, saying that SD67 should not just be responsible to the needs of students and the educational community but to the larger taxpaying public as well.
Given their chance to rebut, Geoffrey Litherland of Harris and Co. argued that during a process spanning several years, a great deal of public consultation had been done. He presented affidavits from superintendent Gary Doi, former board chair Connie Denesiuk, director of maintenance John Hickling and secretary-treasurer Frank Regehr, all of whom were heavily involved in the consultation process.
“It has been a five-year process. There’s been a lot of board work done” said Regehr, who felt they had provided Barrow with a well-researched package of information.
If the court approves their injunction on Tuesday, PLEASE chairman Dave Shunter said the group will begin work on a business plan and ways of raising the millions needed to preserve the old buildings. But if the judge doesn’t grant the injunction, he added, PLEASE won’t be giving up — they’ll just begin work on another plan.
“It isn’t over yet,” said Siddon.
“That’s my bottom line.”
Friday, July 4, 2008
Anita Fashler: Not worthless after all
A slightly edited version of the following appeared in the July 4th, 2008, edition of the Penticton Herald:
Why does the school board and city council call the north gym and auditorium “worthless, surplus to the school’s needs” (Penticton Herald, 6 June 2008)? Why did they pursue an over half million dollar upgrade of the gym while at the same time planning it’s demolition? Why are all practical, common sense alternatives made by numerous public groups representing the taxpayers of Penticton immediately rejected by your elected officials? Many local groups and individuals have documented the usefulness and relevancy of both the gym and the auditorium. In fact, the recent court challenge requesting a re-evaluation of the demolition of these buildings includes sworn affidavits giving specific facts and figures. Alternatively the School Board and City Council are anxious to complete their original plans for demolition before the next civic election. It is difficult to view this decision as anything more than arbitrary and a grave misjudgment of public assets.
Why would the auditorium be viewed as “worthless” when Penticton has only one other functioning arts venue? For example, the City of Vancouver has 15 different arts and cultural venues. In addition to these public theatres, the Vancouver School Board has five high schools with auditoriums seating from 520 to 742. Four of these five facilities are decades old. The recently re-built Magee Senior Secondary included a new auditorium with 550 seats, replacing their previous facility. Apparently in other cities, high school auditoriums are not considered “worthless, surplus to school needs”. Penticton has two arts venues, including the Cleland Theatre and the joint school/community Pen High auditorium. The Pen High auditorium has seating for 743.
The high school auditoriums in Vancouver are used for the schools but are also rented for public use on weekdays, weekends, and during vacations. When rented, these facilities are providing revenue to the School Board. Rental rates during the school year range from $404 for the first four hours on weekdays to $834 on weekends. These rates increase during the summer months. The Penticton School Board has admitted to not vigorously advertising for out of school rentals, no doubt to support their opinion that the building is “worthless”.
The Penticton School Board and the City Council are powerful bodies. As such, they have pursued their demolition agenda without listening to their constituents. However, the public should know that they themselves are the ultimate power, with the Board and Council merely their elected representatives. The redevelopment of Pen High was presented over 4 years ago. With persistent public pressure and exposure, the people of Penticton are now becoming aware that this plan was not all undertaken in good faith.
The gym and auditorium are neither worthless nor surplus to school and community needs. For example, the auditorium has unique acoustic properties (Jonathan Sevy, letter to city council and school board, October, 2003). Several employees of the city’s park and recreation department have openly admitted that the current demand for prime-time gym space in Penticton exceeds capacity (Michael Brydon, April, 2007). If the auditorium and gym were marketed, they could raise funds for the school and the community or help to pay for their own maintenance and operation. How can burying these buildings in a landfill be responsible use of tax dollars?
The plans prepared by community experts to retain the gym and the auditoriums were based on detailed analysis, not sentimentality. They mapped out alternative configurations that would not affect the new school. The response from the School Board was “it is still our property and still our decision” (Brydon, April, 2007). The Board itself did no feasibility studies on possible retention of these buildings during any of their planning decisions. Your elected officials have never wavered in 4 years: they need a parking lot and it has to be exactly where these buildings now stand.
The future of the gym and auditorium must be based on honest documented data and reflect the wishes of the common sense, practical and responsible taxpayers of Penticton. It should not be left to the arbitrary whims of politicians near the end of their mandate.
Anita Kvestich Fashler (Vancouver)
Why does the school board and city council call the north gym and auditorium “worthless, surplus to the school’s needs” (Penticton Herald, 6 June 2008)? Why did they pursue an over half million dollar upgrade of the gym while at the same time planning it’s demolition? Why are all practical, common sense alternatives made by numerous public groups representing the taxpayers of Penticton immediately rejected by your elected officials? Many local groups and individuals have documented the usefulness and relevancy of both the gym and the auditorium. In fact, the recent court challenge requesting a re-evaluation of the demolition of these buildings includes sworn affidavits giving specific facts and figures. Alternatively the School Board and City Council are anxious to complete their original plans for demolition before the next civic election. It is difficult to view this decision as anything more than arbitrary and a grave misjudgment of public assets.
Why would the auditorium be viewed as “worthless” when Penticton has only one other functioning arts venue? For example, the City of Vancouver has 15 different arts and cultural venues. In addition to these public theatres, the Vancouver School Board has five high schools with auditoriums seating from 520 to 742. Four of these five facilities are decades old. The recently re-built Magee Senior Secondary included a new auditorium with 550 seats, replacing their previous facility. Apparently in other cities, high school auditoriums are not considered “worthless, surplus to school needs”. Penticton has two arts venues, including the Cleland Theatre and the joint school/community Pen High auditorium. The Pen High auditorium has seating for 743.
The high school auditoriums in Vancouver are used for the schools but are also rented for public use on weekdays, weekends, and during vacations. When rented, these facilities are providing revenue to the School Board. Rental rates during the school year range from $404 for the first four hours on weekdays to $834 on weekends. These rates increase during the summer months. The Penticton School Board has admitted to not vigorously advertising for out of school rentals, no doubt to support their opinion that the building is “worthless”.
The Penticton School Board and the City Council are powerful bodies. As such, they have pursued their demolition agenda without listening to their constituents. However, the public should know that they themselves are the ultimate power, with the Board and Council merely their elected representatives. The redevelopment of Pen High was presented over 4 years ago. With persistent public pressure and exposure, the people of Penticton are now becoming aware that this plan was not all undertaken in good faith.
The gym and auditorium are neither worthless nor surplus to school and community needs. For example, the auditorium has unique acoustic properties (Jonathan Sevy, letter to city council and school board, October, 2003). Several employees of the city’s park and recreation department have openly admitted that the current demand for prime-time gym space in Penticton exceeds capacity (Michael Brydon, April, 2007). If the auditorium and gym were marketed, they could raise funds for the school and the community or help to pay for their own maintenance and operation. How can burying these buildings in a landfill be responsible use of tax dollars?
The plans prepared by community experts to retain the gym and the auditoriums were based on detailed analysis, not sentimentality. They mapped out alternative configurations that would not affect the new school. The response from the School Board was “it is still our property and still our decision” (Brydon, April, 2007). The Board itself did no feasibility studies on possible retention of these buildings during any of their planning decisions. Your elected officials have never wavered in 4 years: they need a parking lot and it has to be exactly where these buildings now stand.
The future of the gym and auditorium must be based on honest documented data and reflect the wishes of the common sense, practical and responsible taxpayers of Penticton. It should not be left to the arbitrary whims of politicians near the end of their mandate.
Anita Kvestich Fashler (Vancouver)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)