To the Editor,
On April 20, many parents attended the public forum listening to the superintendent stress that the attendance area proposal wasn’t decided upon yet. I’m sorry, but that is a farce. Their minds, in my opinion, were already made up despite the oppositional stance held by the majority of the parents attending the Barrhead session - despite the majority of parents answering the survey being against it, as well.
In our area alone (east of the Pembina on the northern boundary of the Dunstable region) we have 10 children affected by this. One of which, would be the only one whose school would change from Barrhead Elementary School (BES) to Dunstable. That leaves nine children who would continue to go to Barrhead for school; however, these nine children will now face a much longer and unnecessary bus ride as they will transfer buses at Dunstable.
Why do these kids have to suffer in order that the board can try to get one more in attendance at Dunstable to move it closer towards viability? That’s what this all boils down to, trying to keep these small schools viable. What about the welfare of children having to be on buses for a longer time? What about the safety of these children traveling up and down Highway 33 every day? Well, I’m sorry, but we are going to do everything we can to ensure both of our children continue to attend BES.
Some may take the position that BES is overcrowded. Well, in my opinion, the Board can use the funds from closing down the Little House on the Prairie schools and direct it towards the schools in town for expansions and/or portables.
Don’t let the Board fool you in their decision making process. This strategy was entirely political. Their first reviews were held in the fall of 2015. In those sessions, they looked at bussing, particularly stopping transfer buses altogether to increase attendance at these little schools. The only parents who were directly informed of these meetings, were those who lived in the areas affected. The board had already planned to review the attendance boundaries in the New Year, and had this in mind when dealing with the first issue at hand. However, where were the letters to the parents who would potentially be affected by this new change had it gone through? None of us in the proposed boundary changes were given the courtesy of a mailed letter to inform us that they were even considering cancelling transfer buses. So, if this first motion was approved, and subsequently, the latter attendance area motion, those parents in the proposed boundary change areas would not have had a chance to voice their concerns. We never had a chance to give our input at these initial public sessions because we had no idea of what they were doing.
Don’t be fooled. This School Board is not run by our friends nor those thinking of the best welfare of our children. This, my friends, is seriously dirty politics.
Jennifer Pederson
