10 bucks! That's ridiculous. The taxpayers deserve a decent return on their investment.

While I understand how these parents in Dunster feel,selling off our schools to private interests seems like a step in the wrong direction.
Will this set a dangerous precedent for other schools to follow?
When did schools become a commodity to be bought and sold?
I think this is another step in the wrong direction, by a government that just doesn't give a damn about anything but money, and they don't care how they get it!
If they download schools onto the parents,what's next?

I have to agree with the ocmments so far. I wonder what the other schools in PG sold for? There have been a few since all the school closures started & I'm willing to bet the purchasers paid a heck of a lot more than $10. Probably a few more zeros added on to the end of that number.

On the contrary, I support SD#57 to off load a school that is closed in the middle of nowhere. Even if it is closed, SD #57 needs to heat, maintain it and insure it all the time. Once it is sold, there goes all of its liabilities and then the savings makes an impact on the budget. Thus the price on it being $100,000 or $10. it makes no difference to the SD. How long would the SD have to wait for a $100k offer likely 5 years. The cost of maintaining an empty school for 5 yrs is more than 100k. Kapish. ..... kapish.

Saying all that, a closed down school in PG is worth a lot more, because it has revenue potential. Thus, the school district can ask for more money, and or rent it out like Highland Community center. The SD, is being cautious not to sell all the properties that are closed, because they may need to build it twenty or fifty years from now. It is hard to assemble land of that size.

Will the SD sell off Ness Lake, likely not, they will pay the cost of maintaining it or rent it out. The school is new, and unfortunately the locals rather have their kids attending the schools in town. People, understand, encatchment area. that is why they built it. now its gone.

Its not an easy task that the SD needs to do, but they have to do it. they take a lot of crap, but it is still in the best interest for the education not to squander away costs operating half filled classrooms.

I am sending my offer in for Springwood school now. I will go ten times the Dunster offer.
$100 - I'll pay in cash thanks. Let me know where to pick up the keys

I am unsure of what the specific law is about school property in BC. However, in general in both Canada and the USA I believe it to be that the province owns the land and improvements, not the School District. That is presumably why the information was sent to Victoria. The district operates it in trust for the province.

In essence, the property belongs to the community. I doubt that the Regional District wants it for purposes of maintaining it as a school.

I have not got the faintest how the Society is set up. But, as a not for profit society, any funds they have left after disolution must go to another not-for profit or be given to the province. Those maters would be dealt with in the Constitution.

Please note the last paragraph above. "Some of the students will head to McBride, some to Valemount, some to home schooling under the Center for Learning Alternatives. Pepper says whatever choices are made, the DOLLARS WILL FOLLOW THE STUDENTS and will stream through those options.

So, there are SOME operating dollars there. The province will not give any money for building improvements or maintenance, it seems. So, the Society will do that.

The SD is not about making money, it is about providing a community service. The money is made through taxation.

This is the community assisting in that process because the government is failing to provide something which it can no longer do in today's world. That is the way schools originated in pioneer communities.

I applaud these people. Let them come up with a plan in conjunction with the SD of how to use the money the SD has, coupled with the money/volunteer time the community can muster to maintain the building in a clean and operable condition.

I would like to see the Dunster Fine Arts School Society try to make a go of it.

But why is the first step to buy the school? Why doesn't the School District agree to rent it to them for a few years with the requirement that the society is responsible for all costs associated with the property. The Society can be given a right to purchase the property at fair market value if they are able to make a go of it.

Gus.

I too applaud these people who are working their butts off to try to make this happen. We need more people like this in our community.

You are correct about the rules on the the distribution of assets on the dissolution of a society. It is set out in s.73 of the Society Act.

However, s.73 only applies to the assets left over on the winding up of a society after it is finished. There is nothing that prevents a society from selling its assets to pay its debts and expenses. If this venture fails, it is possible that the building would be sold and the proceeds used to pay salaries, management fees, consulting fees, etc.

I don't see the reason for step 1 to be transfer ownership of the school.

If He Spoke is right and this school has absolutely no value then who cares, but if the asset is worth a lot, I don't think it should be given away to this risky venture.

Slippery slope!

Next the Ministry of Education may require that all schools in the province will need to be purchased and maintained by communities, in order to offload costs from Victoria.

Which community is next...Vanderhoof...maybe College Heights?

Doesn't it seem a little strange that successive governments have found the money to keep this school open for over 90 years and now this current Liberal government cannot seem to find the resources? I guess our previous governments were a little better at managing the provinces finances?

Didn't the Ministry of Ed. not allow Vancouver to sell any of their closed schools as a way of raising funds to cover their district's budget needs. As for the offloading of costs, that definitely seems to be the plan right across the board.

I would not be one bit surprised, if the school becomes a private school. with teachers working for a private company.

This is OK, as long as it meets certain standards.

I have not had kids in school for a long time, So out of curiosity. How much money is chewed up in fees for this or that in a year per kid?

KOlberg, What difference would it make to the SD how risky the venture is. Once it is out of SD's hand, they would not have to worry about it. They are not responsible for the success or failure of that venture.

The biggest challenge that we are facing is that families are having fewer kids, meaning that we do no need as many schools as we did thirty years ago. In the Seventies, we probably had 20,000 students. I think the number is likely in the 13000 range. Meaning that schools are going to get centralized, and the kids are going to be bussed. We need to manage the encatchment area. We just need to adjust to different conditions.

I would not be surprised if the old schools with less than 200 students become obsolete. There will be one big elementary school (k -6)in the Hart, College heights, three in th bowl, one in blackburn.

Middle school, (7-9) one in the Hart, CH, two in the bowl.

High School, (10-13) One in the Hart, CH, two in the bowl.

For those who noticed. Grade 13, Don't be surprised if we do not get Grade 13 in ten years, some provinces have it.

I think the days of seeing little Johnny walking to school are gonna disappear. I think little Johnny is going to be walking to a central spot to be picked up to go to a mega school of 1200 kids.

The school district will then need to deal with the social issues arising from this change.

He Spoke>> why stop there with the centralization??? PG is only a 55 minute flight from Richmond..how about just one big school down there??

It's funny how this Liberal government can find $250,000 for each unit in a low income housing unit, or $11 million for 20 cells up on the hill...but Shirley Bond cannot find a few thousand to keep the Dunster school open?? The Socreds could find the money, the NDP could find the money...but I guess $900 million [admitted] on the Olympics is easier to fund??

I think that the question of small community rural school needs has not been adequately addressed by the province. School Districts seem to be taking the flack and I do not think they should.

Here is the Ministry's site that deals with disposal of school properties after they are closed.
http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/policy/policies/school_closure.htm

I doubt that adequate consultation has been had on that and maybe any of the other schools that are being closed at this time.

Possbile uses that are supposed to be explored:
1. Government made a 2008 throne speech commitment to study the possible implementation of all-day kindergarten for five year old children and optional all-day programs for three and four year old children. Future school space requirements related to these new initiatives must be considered prior to disposing of currently underutilized or surplus property.

2. child care services,
3. adult and industry training education programs,
4. family resource centres,
5. seniors’ centres,
6. public libraries,
7. health care and therapy services,
8. local social services,
9. community recreation programs

Has SD57 done all that? Icannot find any information on that.

Yes, my main concern is not that the government should be making a buck on this for the sale of the school. My major concern is that the government is not making sure that a community asset is going to be properly used and maintained for community use.

There is nothing that says a building must be ONLY a school or ONLY a library or ONLY a seniors centre or whatever.

Think outside of th building that boxes a single use. Thik creatively and take on the responsbility that you have (the school board) to the community whether it is school or not.

In that way, I agree it is a slippery slope when people who are paying school taxes also have to end up paying for the building.

"The Socreds could find the money, the NDP could find the money"

Sorry, different times, different circumstances.

Socreds were there when there was growth virtually everywhere. They were building schools, not closing them. Both they, and the NDP most definitely, saw the writing on the wall with regards to the demographic shift. However, not a single one addressed the issue!!

So the current government is facing the situation of a mismatch of school locations in relation to the young family locations. THAT is the root of the problem and no one has a solution other than closure and building new schools in new locations.

Why are these always partisan issues. They are not! They are issues of the opertional managers not the policy mangers!! Those who are the bureaucrats in Victoria most certainly, but also the School Districts, are the ones who can do a better job!! They are career people who are supposed to be experts in running an education system and everything that goes with it. The ministers change with cabinet shifts and shifts in government. The bureaucrats stay on and there are only minor shifts in how they approach a probleam under one government versus another.

Guess what. If you think politicians have it tough listening to those who elect them, they probably more often have a tough time to NOT listen to their career government employees who are actually the experts or considered to be such by many.