Discussions

They are crying that they are out of space and need a new school??? They are not utilizing the spaces that they have. Riverview is half full of classrooms to the point that they were able to move Green Acres into it while the roof was being fixed. All of the old "Junior High" schools used to have spaces for the Grade 9 classes. Brandon School Division does not need anymore schools plain and simple. They need to utilize the buildings they have instead of wasting more tax payer money.

You are right that as of now throughout the division, overall the school division is under capacity. Of course utilizing all schools to manage the individual schools that are over or under capacity would mean reconfiguring catchment areas and probably almost doing away with school of choice. That means lots of kids in new schools, are you okay with your kid changing schools?  
 
While that might work in the short term, but looking at anticipated enrolment based on the birth rate info from the rha, in about 4 or 5 years the division will be over capacity. And that's just birth rate, it doesn't take into account people who move into the area. We do need a new school built, and given how long the process will take, we need an announcement sooner rather than later.

I can only speak for Riverheights school but the enrollment in nearly double what it was 6 years ago and is bursting at its seams. They have made the Pitt smaller to create offices at the back, my kids classes last year had 28 students which seems high to me. I would think they are going to have to use mobile classrooms soon at the rate it is growing. The school concert which used to be in the gym was moved to a church to increase seating, and this year was held at the WMCA to accommodate all the kids/parents.

What birth rate info are you referring to?

The problem in Brandon is not necessarily physical space, but numbers of students within different areas of town. There are different areas of town that have higher populations of kids, and so some schools are overflowing not only with numbers, but physical space. Trying to reconfigure catchment areas to even all of this out would be very difficult.  
I do however think that the location for the new school is very odd. It is supposed to cater mostly to the Patricia heights kids, but is not being built within the neighborhood. Schools should be built within more residential area's, not such a commercial area. I would think the proposed Brookwood Area is a smarter location, and then bus the patricia kids heights there. The combined populations from both neighborhoods would fill the school and free up a ton of space at linden lanes and riverheights, and possibly even king george. The new school would be in a quieter area and be safer for kids.

The rha supplies the school division with the number of births per year. It helps them forecast enrolment. Based on the numbers provided, the school division will be over capacity in the next 4-5 years. I can't remember where I saw the projections or else I'd post it.

Of course overcrowding is an issue, there is one LESS school in this city than there was 20 years ago and MORE children.  
Too bad they deveoped the school yard at Fleming - you can not tell me it will cost less to build a new school than it would have to remediate the asbestos in that school!

Probably is cheaper to build new than re do fleming.  
 
Is this location at 19th and Maryland a done deal, or is there still the possibility to see it go elsewhere?  
I for one, would not want my young children attending a school so close to the highway and in a commercial area. We would be affected by the placement of this school, and our kids would likely end up there if they re structure the catchment area's, and that makes me a bit uncomfortable really.

Crossroads said "Of course overcrowding is an issue, there is one LESS school in this city than there was 20 years ago and MORE children.   Too bad they deveoped the school yard at Fleming - you can not tell me it will cost less to build a new school than it would have to remediate the asbestos in that school! "

10 years ago.... Fleming was closed down because " the roof was going to fall & the oiler was sold it could blow up ". Isn't it rather ironic that it is still being used as a school ??

I see the location info of the new school has been corrected. That makes more sense now.  
 
So many people saying that some of the east end schools are way under capacity, so why not shuffle the patricia heights kids east, instead of bussing them all the way to riverheights? The west end schools are the ones that seem to be overflowing, and I see that they are building yet another addition on to waverly.

Wasn't it proposed a few months ago that Brandon really needed two new schools?  
I just find it really dumbfounding that our government doesn't step up and make our education system more of a priority.  
We are one of the lowest ranking provinces in education scores, but issues like overflowing class sizes don't seem to be taken very seriously. Coming from a parent with a child with extra support needs, we also have experienced first hand how hard it is to obtain any government funding for our child. Seeing as the latest stats for autism alone is 1 in 68 children being somewhere on the spectrum, and these kids are stuck in overflowing classrooms, with little or no extra support, don't you think that is contributing to Manitoba's decline in scores as well. Last year our child was in a classroom that was well over capacity, and was denied any funding. She did not do as well as we'd hoped. This year, she got lucky enough to be in a classroom that was not too full, and because of the number of children with extra needs, the classroom had support staff. She did so well in school, we were absolutely amazed at how much of a difference it made when the teacher was able to work with a smaller group of kids, and also have extra staff for support.  
 
Really, just give Brandon the two schools they need, and while your at it, tear down fleming and give those children that are using it a safer place to be. If it wasn't safe for the BSD kids, then it's not safe for anyone.  
 

I know hindsight is 20/20  
 
But really. Close Fleming for Brandon students and it's ok for S V students. Much cheaper even back then to gut it and remodel. I'm sure today it would still be a deal to fix it up versus the cost of a new school... millions.  
One of the worst decisions from BSD and the city ever to close down the school and sell off that land.  
 
I just love looking at those parking lots of C Union. Did we really need another credit union.  
 
Disgusts me to think all that green space gone. Sickening. Of course I live in the area.

Zekeland said "I know hindsight is 20/20     But really. Close Fleming for Brandon students and it's ok for S V students. Much cheaper even back then to gut it and remodel. I'm sure today it would still be a deal to fix it up versus the cost of a new school... millions.   One of the worst decisions from BSD and the city ever to close down the school and sell off that land.     I just love looking at those parking lots of C Union. Did we really need another credit union.     Disgusts me to think all that green space gone. Sickening. Of course I live in the area. "

My kids had gone there just before it closed. There were usually 32 to 34 kids in theirclasses. Went to all the meetings on the closure. ..heard all the BS. Talked to the guy who looked after the boiler ( heating system. ..he said it was just fine . The roof needed " a bit of work ". Not 5 years later they were screaming about overcrowding....ridiculas.

I wish I could pull up all the stats they presented at the consultation meetings a couple of years ago. To the best of my recollection, the onformation provided at those meetings where:  
 
1. When the decision to dispose of Fleming was made, every single projection at that time indicated that division enrollment was deceasing and could continue to decline. Since that time, both PPCLI relocated to Shilo and Maple Leaf started recruiting overseas. That significantly altered the projection numbers, but by that time it was too late. I can't recall if the school division had any sort or warning or consultation for either of these events, but I would suspect not.  
 
2. Since 2008, the birth rate has been generally increasing, and Brandon in particular has been experiencing a baby boom. This is in part due to immigration, but also demographics as the Millenials come of age and start having children.  
 
3. Building of schools is at the mercy of the province, and the school division, while they can request the funds, areessentially at the mercy of the provinceal government. And we're not in Winnipeg, so there's not huge incentive there.  
 
4. Whenever the catchment areas are redrawn, there is always uproar.  
 
5. The province's 20k4 initiative ties the province's hands in terms od class sizes.  
 
All together, Brandon needs a new school.

If we were to go back 20 years Brandon is actually down two schools from then. There used to be one across from north end community centre which is now a seniors complex.  
 
Some schools may not be at total capacity while others are at or beyond capacity, so they look at general for the amount of students and amount of school space all together schools are over limit. We have people saying fill the available schools to capacity but that doesn't solve the issue in the long run. And then you will get parents start complaining about class sizes. We are at riverheights and they are above capacity. In May there was 60 new kindergarten kids registered this doesn't include any late registrations or new people possibly moving into the area. With riverheights kindergarten being full time there is 3 kinder classes. They added the 3rd classroom last year I believe, so it's just going to keep filling up.  
 
Over all, I agree the city needs another school!

Mr.Slurpee said "They are crying that they are out of space and need a new school??? They are not utilizing the spaces that they have. Riverview is half full of classrooms to the point that they were able to move Green Acres into it while the roof was being fixed. All of the old "Junior High" schools used to have spaces for the Grade 9 classes. Brandon School Division does not need anymore schools plain and simple. They need to utilize the buildings they have instead of wasting more tax payer money. "

Brandon needs a new school. The school needs to be on 9th and Maryland (which it is already zoned for). There are particular areas that need the school and 9th street south is one of them, and next will be Brookwood!  
 
Maybe you should go into other schools besides Riverview and see the amount of kids in that school, or maybe they should combine King George into Riverview. Let King George be the catchment for Brookwood and 9th st south.  
 

Has almost 300 students. I don't think they would all fit into Riverview

I had heard a discussion once, about once ACC all moves to the north hill, that the ACC on Victoria would become a new Super Highschool, making Crocus and possibly Neelin, into elementary schools. Anyone else heard this? Unfortunately that is probably 3-5 years away  

I think there definitely needs to be a new school built at 9 and Maryland get it started now so it's ready for next year

Abbysmum said "I wish I could pull up all the stats they presented at the consultation meetings a couple of years ago. To the best of my recollection, the onformation provided at those meetings where:     1. When the decision to dispose of Fleming was made, every single projection at that time indicated that division enrollment was deceasing and could continue to decline. Since that time, both PPCLI relocated to Shilo and Maple Leaf started recruiting overseas. That significantly altered the projection numbers, but by that time it was too late. I can't recall if the school division had any sort or warning or consultation for either of these events, but I would suspect not.     2. Since 2008, the birth rate has been generally increasing, and Brandon in particular has been experiencing a baby boom. This is in part due to immigration, but also demographics as the Millenials come of age and start having children.     3. Building of schools is at the mercy of the province, and the school division, while they can request the funds, areessentially at the mercy of the provinceal government. And we're not in Winnipeg, so there's not huge incentive there.     4. Whenever the catchment areas are redrawn, there is always uproar.     5. The province's 20k4 initiative ties the province's hands in terms od class sizes.     All together, Brandon needs a new school."

Sorry to say but 10 or was it 11 years ago when we fought so hard to save Flemming we tried to tell BSD that when the people employed at Maple Leaf brought their families to Brandon to join them enrollment would increase but BSD refused to hear our words. Much too late now I think Flemming belongs to Sioux Valley.  
 

Why the portable classrooms? Where has BSD been on a Provincial Level that we are dealt with this?  
 
Is it politics?  
 
Just wondering.  
 

Nor said "I think there definitely needs to be a new school built at 9 and Maryland get it started now so it's ready for next year "

dreaming. Just look at how long it is taking for a 2 room addition at meadows. It was started in Sept. 2014. It may not even be ready for September 2015! The same situation at Waverly.  
 
Brandon needed a new school last year. take a good look around them- support staff and teachers are working in hallways, coat closets, broom closets stair wells and elevator foyers.  
This is not conducive to optimal learning.

NOYB said "I had heard a discussion once, about once ACC all moves to the north hill, that the ACC on Victoria would become a new Super Highschool, making Crocus and possibly Neelin, into elementary schools. Anyone else heard this? Unfortunately that is probably 3-5 years away   "

Too bad the option that makes the most sense is likely the one with the lowest chance of happening.

Riverheights is overcrowded, likely not the only one but it is visibly struggling. Not sure why it is chosen to run at such high numbers being an open concept school where noise is an issue. It gets buses from the new area off 9th and one from Brookwood not to mention already taking 7/8's kids from Valleyview. It also has the Lifeskills program, a great program but it needs space too. Not sure why it would take on 3 full time kindergarten classes or maybe more with the high numbers which seems crazy for space, school design and shared programming. Not to mention many other issues that go with overcrowding. Unlikely to change anytime soon but a bus or two less might be helpful!

BSD still responsible for transporting high school students? Don't recall riding the bus to high school (+20 years ago), but can't remember if that was because it wasn't cool, or wasn't provided? Lol.  

There have been a few questions that have arisen in this conversation that I would like to address. My comments are provided as an individual trustee and I do not speak on behalf of the Board. I believe that the opinions I express below have all been previously stated by me in our public board meetings.  
 
High school student bussing: BSD Policy 9021 establishes that transportation must be provided for all high school students who reside more than 2.4km from school or who are unable to walk to school because of physical or other handicaps. K-8 students are eligible if they reside more than 1.6km from their school. In regards to the potential of the ACC Victoria Avenue campus as a school site, this is certainly a concern, as relatively few residences fall within the 1.6km radius, compared to other potential school sites, and I personally believe that it would result in BSD being required to purchase a number of additional busses, each of which currently costs us about $120,000 to $135,000.  
 
Please note that when I originally posted this comment, I accidentally identified the bussing distance for high school students as 1.6km. Apologies for any confusion.  
 
ACC Victoria Avenue Campus: The Division is currently participating in a study, funded by the Province, that is examining the feasibility of the current ACC campus as a future school site. While I have concerns about the site, including the bussing situation mentioned above, we are participating in good faith and I personally am optimistic that the facility may meet at least some of our needs. One opportunity I am particularly interested in is the possibility of refurbishing some of the abandoned shops spaces for use for some of our grade 7/8 electives, thus allowing us to convert those areas of existing schools to additional classrooms.  
 
Enrolment Capacity: While most of our schools are near capacity, it is true that some schools are closer to capacity than others. If enrolment projections are accurate, our enrolment will exceed our current capacity by 120 students by the 2019-20 school year. That capacity will need to be provided via school additions or portable classrooms, unless a new school is announced or other creative solutions are found.  
 
Catchment Areas: A few weeks ago, the Board decided that we will review catchment areas in anticipation of possible changes for the 2016-17 school year. Please note that there will be no changes made this upcoming September. Via BSD Policy 1021, the Board has committed to consultation with those who are affected by decisions such as catchment area changes, so this fall we will be holding public consultations regarding any potential catchment area changes. In past catchment area consultations, the public has had the opportunity to voice their opinion on a number of potential options that could resolve school capacity issues.  
 
Fleming School Closure: This predates my time on the Board, but I understand that there were serious concerns with the physical state of the building at the time, as stated by some commenters on this discussion. All I can say about it now is that hindsight can often provide a new perspective on decisions that was not available at the time they were made.  
 
I hope this information provides answers to some of the questions that have been raised. If anyone has any further questions, or wish to discuss this issue with a trustee, I invite you to contact me directly either by email at sumner.kevan@bsd.ca or by phone at (204) 573-5815.  
 
 
 
 
Edited by Kevan Sumner, 2015-07-15 16:17:20

1.6km ?? Huh...wish I'd known that a few years back. Both my kids could have been bused to highs school !!

I made an error in my previous post, which I probably wrote too quickly. For high school students, the distance at which they become eligible for transportation is 2.4km. My apologies for the confusion. I will correct my previous post.

I feel you're basing many of your statements off wrong assumptions about the enrolment process for high school. Any student from anywhere in the city can go to any of the high schools, they don't really have catchment areas like the early and middle years schools do. In fact the bsd website doesn't mention catchment at all past grade 8. Most students don't choose their high school based on proximity, they base it on what the school has to offer in terms of classes and other programs. Also there is little, really no, residential development occurring in the east end, so while there may be some students who would fall in the 2.4K limit for bussing, the vast and growing majority will need to be bussed.  
 
Next you mention making Neelin a K-8 school, in those plans what happens to the Lifeskills program? Certainly K-8 students are not the peers of 15-21 year old students, so keeping the Lifeskills program at Neelin as a K-8 school removes any chance of inclusion for those students. I suppose an area of ACC could be remodelled to accommodate the Lifeskills program, but it would be costly to install all the specialized equipment needed.  
 
I don't at this time have an opinion of using ACC as a school, whether high school or early/middle years, because I recognize that I don't have enough information to make an educated judgement as to its suitability and sustainability.  

BSD got approval for a new school in the 2015/16 budget we wouldn't see an actual facility in use for at least 4 years. My son was in grade 8 when they promised a new gym for George Fitton they got the gym when he graduated 4 years later and that's only a gym not a new school. Also has Green Acres got their new gym yet it was promised 4 years ago as well. Funding was suppose to be guaranteed for that. BSD can keep requesting the new school but while they are waiting they need to come up with a more immediate solution.