Derby Public School (home of the Derby Dolphins)

What is being presented tonight: Timeline of recommendation process and final report Summary of past ideas that have been previously presented Overview of main recommendation Why this option? Financial justification associated with main recommendation Other points of consideration Brief synopsis of other recommendation

Time Line: Presentation of final recommendations to the public, which is tonight in the final public ARC meeting A final report will be submitted to Administrative Council on May 26th, 2013 according to Policy BP 3101-D Recommendations will be presented to trustees June 4 th, 2013 Following the sixty day waiting period, final vote by trustees will occur October 22 nd, 2013

Summary of Past Ideas 1) Sale of School with Leaseback Although a innovative idea, there is no precedent of this in Ontario for us to follow suit 2) Status-Quo with Staggered Capital Expenditures The Ministry of Education may not be willing to supply large funds for capital expenditures in a school with an enrolment under 250

The Foundation of Our Main Recommendation: The most important principle of this process is to maintain ties within our community It is critical that all of our Derby students stay together in one location

Main Recommendation: Status-Quo (5-Year Plan with Rural School Consolidation) It is recommended that the Board of Trustees approve the following recommendation (out of the original five that were previously presented): Keep Derby Public School open for the next five years When the 5 year term expires, undergo an accommodation review (AR) with a nearby school also prohibitive to repair (PTR) and perform a future AR with a vision of building a new, consolidated rural school that is in a central location beneficial to both communities Preserve community, parental involvement

Existing Enrolment Projections: (based on Board data)

Proposed Enrolment Projections: (based on Board data)

Financial Justification of Status- Quo with Future Consolidation: Derby generates a capital renewal grant of $27,000 annually There are two points to this: If this money is not spent at Derby over the next five years, these funds can be distributed to schools not PTR in the board. In the 2004 AR, trustees voted on and approved a capital expenditure to fix the gym; this did not happen. Derby students thus will reap the benefits of a new facility. Over the past four years, Derby has managed an average annual surplus of $ in terms of capital renewal 1, 3 No immediate capital expenditure would be required; expenditure in the future will have long-term gain

Financial Justification (Cont’d): Keeping Derby open for the next five years and problem solving collaboratively with the Derby community will avoid a potential loss of $430,000+ in student-based revenue ANNUALLY to the separate board, private schools or home schooling Reduces excess pupil places and getting rid of renewal back log 3 Student projections from Municipality of Georgian Bluffs 5 and the 2004 Derby AR Report 6 both contradict current values shown in Board projections Board will earn revenue from sale of two properties

Other Points of Consideration: Fairness and Productivity Simultaneous examination two schools on PTR list rather than dealing with one issue at a time is more fair, and a better use of time and resources Postponing the AR process until a time when Derby can be examined on a level playing field is best for all parties involved (students, staff, parents, community, the board) The ideal enrolment of 350 in one school would be met (preserving rural communities and eliminating <80% student capacity issue in both schools) Two schools will be removed from PTR list

Points of Consideration (Cont’d): Safety Derby has been deemed safe and will continue to be safe over the next five years without capital expenditure 2 Radon is contained and is not a threat to students and staff If the school were deemed unsafe, the students and staff would not have been allowed to remain in the building

Points of Consideration (Cont’d): Valuation Framework The most valuable attributes of Derby are priceless and unfortunately cannot be quantified to reveal their worth The decision regarding the fate of the Derby community cannot lie solely upon the theme of finance There are an overwhelming number of positive attributes that pertain to the value of the school: To the student (first and foremost) To the community To the local economy To the board The valuation framework is supplemented by submissions to the ARC and presentations during ARC meetings; it will be included in detail in the final report

Points of Consideration (Cont’d): Better Future Processes Administrative Council may be wary of committing to future capital expenditures; however, ministry priorities and funding will likely change as a result of recent changes in government Our Premier has already written a report concerning flaws in AR processes and that changes must be made It is inevitable that future ARs will have more positive outcomes for our rurally placed schools 7 instead of a “one-size fits all” model 4 We must act now to halt the process or risk losing the integrity and heart of our rural board

Other recommendation: Fix required items at Derby and renovate gymnasium with the partnership of the Municipality of Georgian Bluffs Space would be used by the school during normal school hours, and rented out for functions in the off time Owen Sound Minor soccer has approached Derby with interest in this model This could provide the indoor space that the municipality is now forced to rent from Owen Sound in the form of user fees A large number of grants are available for these spaces

In closing, “For rural kids, few things are more important than being able to go to school in your own community with your own friends. Rural schools help keep communities strong, which is why we’re not only committed to keeping them open – but strengthening them”. (Dalton McGuinty, 2007)

References: 1) Booth, B. (2013). Personal correspondence with Marlissa Nyenhuis. 2) Derby Health and Safety Committee (2013). Summary of Health and Safety Issues. 3) Gibb, A. (Feb. 11 th, 2013). Minutes from ARC Meeting. Retrieved April 29 th, 2013 from AL.pdf 4) Ontario House of Commons (June 3, 2008). Minutes from house proceedings. Retrieved April 29, 2013 from 03&Parl=39&Sess=1&locale=en#P678_ ) Stredwick, C. (January 25 th, 2013). Presentation at Feb. 25 th ARC Meeting. Retrieved May 1, 2013 from %20Feb%2025% pdf 6) Student Accommodation Review (2004). Enrolment – Indexed Projection. Page 13. 7) Wynne, K. (March, 2009). Planning and Possibilities: The Report of the Declining Enrolment Working Group.