SD57 Tired of 'Hoops' In Securing Full Funding For New Duchess

Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:30 AM

Province wants SD57 to pony up millions in the replacement of Duchess Park

If School District 57 wants to replace Duchess Park Secondary with a 900-student school, the Ministry of Education says it will have to ante up $5.5-million dollars.

After many months of consultations, the Ministry sent a letter dated January 15 (see earlier story) saying it is only prepared to pay $25.5-million dollars for a new school that would house 650 students. The letter also stated that the project is being reviewed to determine if there is any opportunity for a public-private partnership.

At last night’s Board meeting, Trustee Lois Boone expressed her frustration at this latest snag. "This is the first time we’ve been asked to look at a 3P project -- a public-private partnership with regards to this -- and it appears to me that it’s another hoop that we have to leap through in order to get Duchess."

Boone put forward a motion, unanimously endorsed by her colleagues, to hold a special meeting of the Board for a conference call with the Deputy Minister of Education. She wants to know exactly what the ministry means by the public-private partnership. "The concept is something I’m having difficulty understanding and, exactly where we are with regards to commitments from them?"

Boone points out the district’s own experts have said the smaller student body at the secondary level just wouldn’t allow the school to provide as many learning opportunities and choices.

Board Chair Lyn Hall says, "I believe out of any district in the province, we’ve really come to the table on two huge capital projects."

"One is the College Heights Secondary School, where we have committed our own dollars -- upwards of five-million -- to complete that renovation project, which is badly needed. " The district took this unusual step last year, when it became apparent that after a decade on the ’wish-list’, the project would never make it onto the Education Ministry’s priority list for capital projects.

Hall says, "Now we’re also coming to the table with Duchess Park and we’re prepared to offer an amount, so I guess I’m looking for some consideration, or more consideration by the Ministry."

Trustee Roxanne Ricard says finding the $5.5-million dollars for Duchess would be a case of "robbing Peter to pay Paul". Ricard says, "It concerns me that we’re having to put all our resources, perhaps, in one basket when there are many other needs, capital needs and what not, throughout the district."

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:30 AM in News by Michelle Cyr-Whiting

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: REALIST on January 31 2007 9:46 AM

P3's? This Life's Leasons class is brought to you by Coors Beer and this math one is sponsered by the Treasure Cove Casino. How sick is this?

Posted by: trusted on January 31 2007 11:18 AM

Well, now, what can I say?
I already predicted the School District would have their hands out for an increase, and lo and behold, they surface rather quickly. The city, of course, had first jump at nailing the taxpayer to pay for work that should have been taken care of yearly on city streets and roads. After all, a new mill rate will be announced by the city, and now is the time for the line up at the trough, as no one wants to be left out of the pickpocket scheme. There has to be more reasons to do a further increase, as, after all, they are limited to a once a year crack at the big property tax payola decisions.
I am not too concerned. The turn out for the 4% levy for roads was rather slim-so the city will be of the opinion that relates to the pickings, and they will be heftier now.
Better start sweating it now, as July is not that far off.
Time for the taxpayers to consider where they can "cut back" as the powers that be have no intention of catering to any taxpayers in the city of Prince George.
So what else is new?

Posted by: Don Wilkins on January 31 2007 1:31 PM

A study of the students numbers has shown that there is plenty of room in present seconadry schools for all the students. Why rebuild Duchess? Most of its students are bused in. PGSS is nearby and that property is worth a lot of money. I agree that a secondary school needs about 800 students to offer a good selection of programs. Huge box type schools are not great places of learning and present more safety concerns. Put the emphasis and money into the other schools.

Posted by: trueblue2 on January 31 2007 3:04 PM

UNBC is facing a money crunch partially due to the fact that enrolment is stagnated.

How many local elementary schools have been closed during the last few years because of the vanishing enrolment.

So the Prince George school board tells the public they are replacing Duchess Park, which is needed. I do not recall ever hearing about additional services that would need to be provided out of that new building. I believe we were all told, and believed, that the new Duchess Park would simply be a replacement of the previous structure.

The school board should have stuck with what was needed, a new building to replace Duchess Park...NOT an education centre, which is what is now on the books.

As for the provincial government's idea that this project now be a PPP (private public partnership) that is ludicrous and irresponsible. Schools should not be sponsored or funded by Coca Cola or Canfor or any other private monies, unless they are a private institution. If we begin to depend on private funding for public education, we will allow for an even more situation of the "haves" versus the "have nots."

Build a new Duchess to accommodate 600. Downtown is not growing. College Heights is.

PS - How will the district afford the sure to be higher operating costs for this now larger-than-needed project?

Posted by: owl on February 1 2007 6:13 PM

Perhaps we need to remind the Ministry of education that the "P" which refers to private would make it a private school. So then, then we open the door for exiting private schools to apply the PPP rule and demand that the government apply the same condition to them and provide the private "P" with money from the public "P".

Sounds to me that Victoria would want to stay away from that.

Maintenance affordability? They will likely argue it will be more energy efficient, the materials will be more easy to clean, and normal maintenance will be relatively low in the initial 5 to 10 years. I would tend to buy that argument.

Then they will let the thing go, as the city does with the roads and bridges, and the SD does with their exiting Duchess Park and previous KGV and tear down "historic" buildings because they have lasted longer than their expected lifetime of 50 years.

Time to tear down the parliament buildings in Victoria, and the Empress Hotel since new buildings will be much cheaper to maintain.

:-)