What the Focus of the School Board Should Be

I recently passed on these additional observations with respect to Rideau High School to community members. It was suggested that they may be of value to the discussion.

Everyone

I felt a need to put some additional thoughts in writing. I trust you do not mind that I share them with you and that they add value to the discussion.

As many of you may know, I am very concerned about what I consider to be the very loose transfer policy of the ocdsb. Personally, I went to school in Toronto, and I raised my children in Kingston, Ontario. I had never previously witnessed such an easy transfer procedure. The way I see things, in Ottawa it is now an accepted practice for parents to shop for schools for their children, basing their decision on what they "hear" is the best school for their child to go to. Essentially, it allows parents (primarily, I believe, those with more resources), to distance themselves from the notion of community when it comes to their child's education.

Putting aside for a moment my concerns about the policy itself, I believe the school board should be very concerned about the perception of schools that these families have. The board should be aware of what these perceptions are. To ascertain these perceptions, the public should be surveyed by the board so that they really do know what the perception is. They need to know what school is "perceived" as no 1, down to what school is "perceived" to be at the bottom. Then, the board needs to compare this with the reality of how well schools are providing for the students in their respective catchment areas.

If perception matches reality, they need to develop an action plan, and execute it, to address what is wrong with the schools needing help. (I can only hope that they are doing this now. I'm a newcomer to this discussion and am not knowledgeable in this area.) To the extent that the perception does not fit the reality, the board needs to take action to address these mis perceptions.

To those who might suggest that this is beyond the board's purview, I believe that it was the liberal transfer policy that opened the door to the "shopping" in the first place. It is a policy that undoubtedly favours those with greater financial resources as they can better afford the added travel burdens. It has encouraged a downward spiraling "ghettoizing" of our schools that feeds on itself. It also encourages an elitist "I'm better than you are" attitude which I see as very troubling. Long before it got to this juncture, the board should have been aware of whether or not there were any community mis perceptions and addressing them with facts.

Every child should genuinely feel pride when they respond to the question "What school do you go to?" Any school board should be very concerned and take effective action whenever this is not the case.

I was very impressed with Rideau High School upon visiting it. It very effectively responds to the needs of its community. Given the chance it could do much more. This school has much to be proud of and the board should be doing WHATEVER IT TAKES to assist Rideau in proclaiming this from the rooftops to encourage this sense of pride.

Rideau High School has a lot to teach other schools about developing a respectful and accepting school environment. I heard a lot of pride about this sense of community when I listened to the students over the brief time I have come to know them in the past month. They deserve the opportunity to feel this respect from the community at large. To be frank, I think that those community members who "look down on" Rideau, should be ashamed of themselves. To me, Rideau is a place that shines, and we need to make sure that Ottawa knows this.

Let me know if there is ever a way that I can help in this endeavour. I'll be there.

Regards,
Leonard

Rideau High School is MY High School

Until about a month ago, I had never visited Rideau High School. It is my local neighbourhood high school, about a 2 kilometer walk from my home. I had never been within its walls because my children had left the public school system by the time I move to this part of Ottawa. School matters, I guess, from my perspective, were for others to be concerned with.

How my views have changed. I owe a debt of gratitude to my neighbour, Chris Ellis, who recently invited my participation in efforts to lobby the school board to not close this local school. If he had not invited me, I would have missed an opportunity to meet some very fine and engaged young people and many others who live near me who are very concerned about the possibility that this local school may close. To learn more about these efforts, visit Chris's website.

Questions from L'Image of Sandy Hill

Questions for the Candidate

1. Funding for Schools

What is the position of your party on extending provincial funding for religious schools?

The Green Party believes in a single publicly funded education system that treats all students fairly and equally. The UN Human Rights Committee has twice censured Ontario for violating the equality of its own citizens by funding Roman Catholic schools but not schools of other religions. The GPO does not support the John Tory solution of funding all faith-based schools. We believe that we should move to one school system with English and French streams.

What is your position for funding other types of private schools (ie. non-religious) like some which operate here in Sandy Hill?

As stated above, the Green Party believes in a single publicly funded education system. We do not support public funding of schools outside of the public system.

What is your party’s position on class size (maximum number of students in a classroom)?

The Green Party recognizes the success of the current government in reducing most class sizes to 20 from Kindergarten to Grade 3. We believe we must extend this effort through to Grade 12.

2. Transportation

What would your party do to provide an alternate route for the heavy truck traffic which currently passes through downtown Ottawa?

I recognize that the need to remove truck transport from downtown Ottawa is great. We must use it as an opportunity to make wise long-term investments in our infrastructure. Our first goal should be to reduce demand for automobile infrastructure by ensuring that a seamless inter-provincial mass transit system is included in any proposal. Second, recognizing that rail is a far more efficient use of energy, the province must begin to plan now for greater reliance on it as opposed to trucks for the transportation of goods. Third, any new infrastructure should be tolled to appropriate cost to users. Finally, we must ensure that we do not repeat the mistake of the King Edward Bridge and allow truck traffic to split apart another community.

3. Homelessness

How does your party plan to address the growing problem of homelessness in the downtown cores of our cities?

I believe that a society is judged by the way it responds to the needs of its most vulnerable. With respect to homelessness, particularly when combined with mental illness and/or drug addiction, our legacy is shameful. Our societal response is patchwork at best, with various agencies scrambling to do what they can for those in need. All too often we resort to “blaming the victim” for their plight. This is inexcusable in the 21^st Century. It is essential that the province develops and implements a comprehensive long-range plan that would ensure that acceptable housing is available to every citizen. We also must ensure that every individual who needs help with drug addictions is provided the treatment needed on a timely basis. Our failure in this area continues to compound problems that destroy neighbourhoods.

The Green Party proposes to address poverty through improvements in the minimum wage, indexing Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program payments to the rate of inflation, and adjust shelter allowances to reflect average local rents as defined by CMHC.
We also propose to divert future budget surpluses to create a $5 billion Long-Term Affordable Housing Investment Dedicated Fund. Annual interest from this Fund would be used to continuously build supported housing, seniors accommodation, affordable housing, rent-to-own housing, coops, co-housing, sweat equity housing, eco-villages.

4. University Education

Sandy Hill is home to many university students. How does your party propose to help these students meet the increasing expense of their education?

The Green Party believes that high tuition is counterproductive to developing both a competitive economy and a qualified, engaged workforce. To address this issue, the Green Party of Ontario will provide $500 million per year by 2011 to cap university tuition at $3000 average per year and college tuition at $700. The Green Party understands that in the 21st century Ontario needs well-educated citizens who are able to achieve their full potential.

5. Public Transit

What support will your party offer to Ottawa as it tries to improve its public transportation system and meet the challenges of future growth?

The Green Party of Ontario is committed to cleaner, cheaper, more efficient and safer forms of transportation. Ontario’s current transportation system is inefficient, expensive, polluting, dangerous and unsustainable. The Green Party envisions a transportation system that does not reduce our quality of life. Our Plan for sustainability would Divert 75% of all money budgeted for new highway construction until 2012 to public transit such as GO Transit, Toronto Transit Commission and Ottawa’s OCTranspo. This will fund the service improvements, expansion and infrastructure renewal required to create a world-class transportation system, relieve gridlock and eliminate the need for new highways.

Will your party support Ottawa’s public transportation system? If so, how?

As noted above, we would shift our transportation investments from highway construction to a far greater emphasis on public transportation.

6. Medical Care

We are fortunate to have the Sandy Hill Community Health Centre in this neighbourhood but the current wait time for Sandy Hill residents to register with this facility is two years. What strategies does your party propose to increase access to primary care for our community in the next 4 years?

The GPO’s health plan takes a broad approach to wellness, with an emphasis on healthy communities, healthy lifestyles and a healthy environment, not just health care. Reducing toxins in our environment, addressing the social determinants of health and encouraging healthy lifestyle choices are important components of the Green Party’s health plan.

Health care reform is urgently needed if we are to have a health care system that is sustainable and viable in the future. The Green Party plan will offer more choice, emphasize prevention and be accountable to the public. The Green Party of Ontario will provide Ontarians in the lowest 75th percentile of income an additional health care allowance of $1,000 per person, phased in over five years at $200 per year, for purchase of prescription drugs and/or care from any practitioner mandated by the Regulated Health Professionals Act (RHPA).

We will immediately increase the budget of the Ministry of Health Promotion from its current 1% level to 2% of the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care’s budget. Since many illnesses result from lifestyle choices, the GPO believes that health promotion is fiscally prudent and will lead to improved wellness. These funds would be used to place nurses in the school system to promote healthy lifestyles and to assist in identifying youth at risk of long-term health problems.

We will increase the funding and effectiveness of primary and preventive health care by:

1) Creating a joint commission of stakeholders to explore best practices for implementation of preventive and primary health care by family doctors, with an emphasis on improved outcomes. This may include rewarding doctors who successfully assist their patients resolve risk factors such as obesity, smoking or uncontrolled high blood pressure.

2) Increasing support and incentives for multidisciplinary clinics and practices that team

doctors with nurses, dieticians, psychologists, counsellors, physiotherapists etc. This is particularly important for taking a holistic approach to mental health, addiction and lifestyle counselling.

Faith Based School Funding - A Choice for Ontario

John Tory, with his early summer announcement that he would extend funding to faith based schools across Ontario, has changed the face of this election. He has clearly drawn a line in the sand on this issue, proclaiming that it is a matter of principle, and the right thing to do.

On the point of it being a principled position, there can be no argument. Dalton McGuinty may believe otherwise, but, the status quo, whereby Ontario funds one religious group to the exclusion of others, is indefensible. Does this mean, though, that we must fund all faith based schools? The Green Party believes that full consideration must be given to the alternative of moving toward a unified public system.

Our current system has its roots in pre-confederation Ontario when a Methodist Minister, Egerton Ryerson, was laying the foundation. There was no consideration at that time of any faith other than Christianity. The only issue was your denomination within that faith. The schism of the day was between Protestant and Catholic.

This is the 21st Century, however, and times clearly have changed. Unfortunately our method of funding education has not.

John Tory, as noted above, would have us solve this by extending funding to all faith based institutions that follow Ministry of Education guidelines and its curriculum. I believe this to be a short sighted path that moves us away from long term sustainability for our education system. Not only financially costly, the ultimate effect is that it moves us toward focusing on what separates us rather than what bring us together.

There are many financial and environmental arguments that can be made against such a proposal. John Tory has already thrown out the figure of investing an extra half a billion dollars to bring this about. This is from someone who professes to be a firm believer in economic efficiency. Environmentally, the profusion of various separate schools would lead to ever more demand for transportation as children go from one side of a city to another to get to their unique school.

However, these immediate costs pale in comparison to the long term social consequences. Ontario’s immigration patterns have changed in the past thirty years. People of a multitude of faiths and ethnic backgrounds have been welcomed. We have had difficulties, but we, and our children, have ultimately learned so much from each other. We are now recognized around the world as an example of how diversity can be celebrated, while simultaneously developing vibrant cohesive communities.

One of my most memorable experiences in this regard was from three summers ago. I had the opportunity to volunteer as a teacher’s assistant in a summer ESL class for teenagers. About twenty students in each class, from at least a dozen different backgrounds. New friendships were being formed amongst the students. I noted in particular two young students who were virtually inseparable in their friendship. One Muslim, the other Jewish, both newly arrived in Canada. And then there was the shy Christian from Jordan helped with his homework by the equally shy Vietnamese Buddhist. It was a memorable summer for all of us. How could this have happened if each newcomer had been directed toward a faith-based education?

In our schools today our children have the opportunity to discover what brings them together while simultaneously appreciating their diversity. I do believe that so many of these opportunities would be lost if we chose the path of further fragmentation of our educational system.

I make the argument then, for a unified school system, not on the basis of the economic and environmental arguments, (although such arguments are valid), but because it simply is the right thing to do to ensure that we continue to develop strong, cohesive, respectful communities.

Responding to Questions from the Manor Park Chronicle

Manor Park Chronicle

September, 2007 Edition

Questions for Ottawa-Vanier, October 10, 2007 Provincial Election

Q1: The NCC and the governments of Ontario and Quebec are jointly funding an Environmental Assessment of proposed locations for one or more new interprovincial crossings. There has been considerable public comment on this issue from politicians at all three levels and from the general public.

Do you favour any of the options under study? Do you believe that Kettle Island would be a viable location for a new crossing?

Word Limit: 275

I currently do not favour any of the options under study. There is a fundamental flaw in the Terms of Reference of the Environmental Assessment. They are based on the assumption that we should continue to encourage and expect growth in demand for automobile and trucking transportation infrastructure. As we are all well aware, Canada, like every other nation, needs to develop and implement action plans that respond to the twin threats of climate change and dwindling carbon based energy supplies. Such action plans therefore, need to point us in the direction of reducing, not increasing our dependence on the personal automobile and reliance on truck transport. Any future transportation infrastructure investments need to recognize this reality.

The need to remove truck transport from downtown Ottawa provides us with the opportunity to make wise long-term investments in our infrastructure. Our first goal should be to reduce demand for automobile infrastructure by ensuring that a seamless inter-provincial mass transit system is developed. Second, recognizing that rail is a far more efficient use of energy, we must begin to plan now for greater reliance on it as opposed to trucks for the transportation of goods. Third, any new infrastructure should be tolled to appropriate cost to users.

I am not in favour of the Kettle Island crossing. According to studies already completed by the NCC and the former Region it has been shown to be the most costly, not only financially, but also environmentally and socially. We need a solution that removes truck traffic from our communities. As your MPP I would work for a transportation infrastructure that brings us to together, instead of splitting us apart.

Q2: Zoning decisions made at the municipal level may be challenged at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). Since the OMB is a quasi-judicial body, a successful case usually depends on legal counsel and expert witnesses.

What are your views on the role and structure of the OMB?

Word Limit: 200

Ontario is unique within Canada in having this type of oversight of municipal decision-making. Like our antiquated municipal tax system, it has its origins in late 19^th Century patriarchal Ontario. It was developed at a time when the only way to legally deal with many municipal matters was through private bills in the Provincial Legislature. Obviously, times have changed and our municipalities have matured. Unfortunately, the OMB has not; as it continues to intervene in the same manner it did over 100 years ago.

Being quasi-judicial it is by definition undemocratic and arbitrary. Far too often a local community will, through democratic process, choose a particular development path, only to be threatened with appeal to the OMB. Local communities are often at a distinct disadvantage as they seldom can match the resources of a deep-pocketed developer.

As your MPP I would propose a thorough review of the mandate and purpose of the OMB. We must start by looking at best practices in other jurisdictions in Canada. How has the rest of the country been served without such an oversight body? Maybe they know something we don’t.

Q3: Municipalities across Ontario are struggling to meet their commitments within their current taxation capabilities. The basis for calculating property assessment for taxation purposes has also been controversial.

What services should be funded by property taxes?

What is the best method to finance municipalities?

Should there be changes to the structure and responsibilities of MPAC (the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation)?

Word Limit: 350

The municipal tax system in Ontario, like the OMB, is a quaint relic of the 19^th Century that has not kept up with the times. The Green Party of Ontario believes that part of the solution lies in moving toward a system that assesses land value, but not the value of buildings and improvements made to such buildings, to determine municipal tax rates. This would vastly simplify the responsibilities of MPAC, as the relative value of building improvements would not be considered in their calculations.

Our plan would encourage development more along the lines of a municipality’s official plan. Land value is proportional not only to its quantity, but also to the scale and type of development permitted. Our proposal would create a disincentive to land speculation, as the property would be taxed according to its full potential for use, as reflected in its assessment and class.

This removes the disincentive of higher taxes on home improvement. A property owner is more likely to invest in best building practices, and erect a carbon neutral facility with the threat of higher taxes removed. This enhances not only the value of the building, but the community at large with cleaner air.

Another part of the solution lies in apportioning taxes according to the cost of specific services provided. Dense communities are generally less costly to serve than sprawling communities. We need a method to recognize this fact when tax bills are calculated.

Changes also are needed to the Provincial Development Charges Act. It is much too restrictive in its definition of what costs municipalities can recoup from Greenfield development. This needs to be changed to ensure that the full cost of urban sprawl is assessed to those who create it.

The cost of services that involve income redistribution and equity-related goals should not be borne by the municipal taxpayer. Therefore the provincial government should take back responsibility for 100% of the funding of all provincially mandated social service programs. The Liberals have had four years to fix the problem created by the Harris Conservatives, yet they have failed to act.

Q4: The provision of a secure electricity supply, while minimizing environmental impacts, is an important issue in Ontario. Ontario has a growing population, yet an aging electricity generation and transmission infrastructure.

What do you propose should be done on both the electricity supply and demand sides?

Word Limit: 175

As Ontario and the world confronts dwindling non-renewable energy reserves we must refocus our strategy on developing local renewable resources.

Unfortunately the province seems determined to make a critical investment error as it considers betting the farm on a $45-billion investment in nuclear energy. It takes at least 12 years to bring a nuclear plant on stream. Historically they have been drastically over-budget and never as reliable as predicted.

Instead, we must invest now in local communities. We need to remove electric element space and water heating from hundreds of thousands of Ontario homes. We must provide real-time feedback to consumers on consumption. We need to aggressively push the installation of solar hot water and geo-thermal earth energy systems.

We need changes to our building and electrical codes and the Planning Act that will mandate the highest energy efficiency of all future construction and development. It is much cheaper, more secure, and more environmentally friendly to conserve a megawatt than produce one. Our future energy security depends on a strong localized energy infrastructure.