The
North Vancouver School District board meeting agenda package for tonight's
board meeting has been posted on their website and it includes notes and
options regarding covered play areas to be presented at this public board
meeting:
http://www.nvsd44.bc.ca/en/Trustees/~/media/PDF_uploads/BoardMeetings/2012_13/BoardAgendaPkg20121127.ashx
(See agenda, page 1-2 and “Schedule B5 of the Administrative Memorandum”, pages
71 -78 to see their proposed options).
Correction
to Finance and Facilities Standing Committee meeting recap notes:
The
notes in the agenda package for the Nov. 27 board meeting include one
significant inaccuracy in the recap of the discussion at the Finance and
Facilities Standing Committee meeting held on Nov. 6th (and we would like to ask
if that can be corrected please? We want to make sure there is no
misunderstanding). It is currently written that “…Further discussion clarified
the primary interest for shelter, rather than a covered play area…” We would
agree that the primary interest is for shelter, but strongly disagree with
“rather than a covered play area”. At the Finance & Facilities Standing
meeting, a couple of people started referring to a covered play area as being
large enough for the kids to play team sports under and we simply pointed out
that we are not seeking anything so extravagant, and that our primary interest
was shelter options for the students; however we didn’t rescinded our
consistent request that it be a useful covered play area for the kids to play
and move within. In the attached email that we sent to you on Nov. 9th in
follow-up to the Finance & Facilities Standing Committee meeting, our
suggestions mention that the children be able to play games against the wall
within the covered play areas.
Note
sent to NVSD regarding recommended motions:
As
you know the motion that was approved in March stated that “…the two options be
presented to the board for approval at its November 2012 board meeting”. We are
hoping that the vote be, as stated in the motion, “for approval” (option A or
B) and not for “support in principal”(option C or D) that would take this into
“policy review” and “deferral”. Please keep in mind the fact that the Highlands
build came in $700,000 under-budget (and a request to the Ministry of Education
can be made to access these “restricted capital funds”). We have been eagerly
waiting for this board meeting since the motion was approved in March, but
delayed until November so that the Finance & Facilities department could
complete some other projects first. In fact, we have been eagerly waiting for
this day since 2006 when the Highlands design plans revealed that there would
be no covered areas. After all of this time, to place this into “policy review”
discussions seems unfair. There were never any policy discussions, nor any
public consultation to decide to forgo covered play areas. Given that covered
areas have been built in North Vancouver schools in the past, and the fact that
the BC Ministry of Education’s Area standards indicate that they may be
included in schools in areas of high precipitation, any decisions to stop
building (or to dismantle) covered play areas should have gone through a policy
review process first.
