The proverbial carrot has been dangled to parents concerned about school closures resulting from Accommodation Review Committees (ARC) in their neighbourhoods, but as with most dangling goodies there are strings attached.
A motion titled Building for Tomorrow: A Facility Framework in Response to the Accommodation Review Committees, was narrowly passed at the March 10 general meeting of the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) after two hours of debate. It is an effort to demonstrate what might be given back to communities that agree to having some schools closed due to low enrolment."Staff understands that to be successful and lead the way for future phases of accommodation reviews, communities must see a benefit and the benefit needs to be tangible for their children and community," read a 21-page staff report presented to trustees.The report outlines $62 million to $72 million dollars worth of investments that could be made in ARC communities to cover building and program upgrades. These numbers are based on staff estimates of costs associated with the final outcome of eight ARCs across Toronto, despite the fact that none of the ARCs have presented their final recommendation to the TDSB.One of the last trustees to speak to the issues was Soo Wong, who encouraged her peers to pass the motions in an effort to, "show strong leadership," and "not completely lose confidence of our constituents."The information presented to trustees will now be taken to individual ARCs so they can better understand their general accommodation options before submitting their report to the board for a final decision on the future of schools.While ARCs will now have more specific financial numbers to consider, many trustees voted against the motion. Trustees say this plan seems to presuppose the outcome of the ARCs. While communities has been explicitly told in many ARCs that school closures do not necessarily equate to sale of property, the wording of the staff report seems to contradict that sentiment when it reads, "facility upgrades in response to the eight ARCs will be funded from the sale of surplus property generated by the eight ARCs, pending Ministry of Education Early Learning Program funding and future pending surplus declarations."The apprehensions of many trustees were vocalized by Howard Goodman, who cited his background in marketing while advising against making what could be seen as promises that might not be delivered on."We need to be honest with our people," said Goodman. "If you show someone something that looks concrete, you have to follow through or you have broken that trust."Even though the plan is a rough draft, he felt many would interpret it as a guarantee of big reinvestments when decisions on school closures, let alone property sales, were far from guaranteed. He would have much preferred to save any financial plans until they consisted of more reliable figures.The motion was passed, but with some notable amendments.The staff report contained references to a long-term capital plans for secondary and elementary schools across the city, but these drafts had not been shown to trustees that were dealing with ARCs that could significantly impact the TDSB's capital assets. The release of these reports to trustees was stipulated in the amended motion, but these plans will not be made public.The motion also included new rules to bring any ARC recommendations that new schools be built to the Operations and Facilities Management Committee and that upgrades resulting from full-day Kindergarten will be addressed separately by committee.The facility framework plan will be now be presented to each ARC before their report is brought to the TDSB while the director of education simultaneously conducts talks with the Ministry of Education in an attempt to secure funding for ARC recommendations.