News   Dec 20, 2024
 1K     5 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 802     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 1.5K     0 

Indoor pools to be closed at 22 schools

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
24,090
Reaction score
14,803
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
From the Saturday Star:

Apr 05, 2008 04:30 AM
Jim Byers
city hall bureau

Pupils and others who use two dozen Toronto District School Board pools will be out of luck come June.

The board yesterday said 23 indoor pools will be drained at the end of the school year because there's no funding to keep them open. Sixteen more will close a year later, officials said, for a total of 39 of the board's 84 pools.

"This board has very serious financial challenges," chair John Campbell said yesterday. "In my view, this is a necessary step."

A board statement said pools used for community and special education programs will stay open.

The board voted last June to begin closing pools Feb. 1 unless the province came through with funding. That hasn't happened.

Massive pool closings threatened in the past haven't come to pass. But Campbell said he's not playing political games.

"If this were a power play I'd be going to Queen's Park with a cup in my hand," he said.

The board's projected savings are $4 million a year.

- With files from Vanessa Lu

Another Mike Harris legacy hits us. Other legacies: music programs, industrial arts, and home economics classes.

Maybe we should drop school buses and use that money for those programs. Children used to walk to school in the city of Toronto, when I went to school. But now you can't walk the 4 blocks because it's too far?
 
Maybe we should drop school buses and use that money for those programs. Children used to walk to school in the city of Toronto, when I went to school. But now you can't walk the 4 blocks because it's too far?

Nobody gets bused for 4 blocks. Many kids are forced to walk very long distances to school. Most busing happens because the students' local school is overcrowded and they have to be moved to a different school that has more space available.
 
It's been a number of years now since Mike Harris was in office. I realize many hate him with a passion, and I wasn't exactly his biggest fan myself, but can we finally give it a rest?

I continue to wonder why the TDSB doesn't sell off some of its surplus real estate. I know some "give" is needed in the system to accommodate future demographic changes, but when you have schools running at 50% of capacity or less, and another school running at 50% or less is within a few blocks, you have to wonder if assets are being managed in the best possible way.
 
I don't understand what the TDSB (or the TCDSB for that matter) are doing with public money. They just sold school property deemed surplus on my block to the Toronto Police Service for the new 11 division HQ for almost $9 million and another property that will be the new home for 14 division, which I believe was around the $4 million mark. I'm sure there's other surplus property being sold off that I'm not aware of bringing more money into the coffers, yet they continue to shutdown much needed services.
They need to be held far more accountable for their financial (mis)management and put under some tougher scrutiny and auditing as they currently seem to answer to no one except themselves and seem to be in a very unhealthy state as a result.
The TCDSB isn't much better (it's still public money). In my neighbourhood for example, there are three elementary catholic schools within a 500 metre radius of each other, all open, but none of them are operating to full capacity.
And now there's the big news about the huge deficit with the teachers pension fund to the sum of $12 billion. I realize this is managed separately but it just seems to be another example of financial mismanagement and analytical forecasting within the system.
 
To touch upon Lilibet's first example, the TDSB sold off surplus property at Davenport and Osler. Yet, they're now closing a pool at the school a mere one hundred metres down the street.
 
To touch upon Lilibet's first example, the TDSB sold off surplus property at Davenport and Osler. Yet, they're now closing a pool at the school a mere one hundred metres down the street.

What adds insult to injury with this particular school pool closure is the bare-faced lie fed to local residents of Carleton Village at a community meeting held by the TDSB after the sale of the Davenport/Osler school property was finalized, telling us that the pool at the open school would be available for use by the community year-round. This is a community in need of public recreational facilities like this. :mad:
 
Quote:
The board's projected savings are $4 million a year.


If there was any reason to bring in a Supervisor this is it. At least someone who can make the tough decisions and cut out some administrative fat and sell off some surplus property. I'm sure savings can be found and those loser trustee's can continue to be useless.
 
Farbeit from me to defend the TDSB.... BUT

Farbeit from me to defend the TDSB, which has many failings...BUT.

Let's get some things clear.

1) The TDSB has NO taxation powers of its own. They are 100% funded by the province of Ontario, according to a funding formula.

2) That formula makes no allocation for swimming pools (and never has).
This is a legacy of the pre-amalgamation school boards in Toronto, which raised their own taxes and deemed pools a local priority. Subsequent to amalgamation they have had to raid funds earmarked for other purposes (say ESL, or Home Ec. etc.) in order to fund the pools.

3) The TDSB is funded per student with a set allocation of square footage. This allocation is standard province-wide. However, with a disproportionate number of heritage buildings, many of which were set-up in ways that are less space-effecient that those of 'modern' schools, they automatically have more sqare foot per person to heat, clean, etc. than other prov. boards. However, the recieve no extra money.

4) Every board in the province is short-changed for maintenance dollars and for utilities. Literally the board is shorted milliions each year for paying its electric bill, these dollars come directly out of other program spending, from teachers, to janitors to capital spending. The province provides more than $1.00 per square foot less to schools for cleaning than it does to maintain Queen's Park! (Think of the squarefootage than over 500 schools adds up to)

5) The province won't pay for pools, because the TDSB is only board in Ontario that has ANY. Its seen as a political problem to fund pools in Toronto, when no one anywhere else has any. (though most rural students get bussed, which certainly isn't true in T.O....but never mind)

ALL THAT SAID....

Yes the TDSB does have a few more administrators than it should. Yes, the TDSB should close some excess schools..... THOUGH, be my guest at deciding which historic building to demolish; and which community should lose its school. Especially in a fast-growing city, where many currenly under-utilised schools will likely be full again in 10 years time.

The TDSB's bureaucracy though is a direct result of amalgamation. As any large company can tell you, over a certain size and the ratio of managers to workers goes up. That's just the way. Ask Bell, Ask Rogers, etc.

However, breaking up the TDSB is a whole other can of worms, when the union contracts and programs have only just now been harmonized, some 10 years after amalgamation.

******

For what its worth.

My take on the answer:

1) The province funds swimming lessons for every elementary student across Ontario, and competive swimming for high school students.

In most parts of Ontario this cost includes rental of swimming facilities since outside Toronto no boards have their own pools.

In Toronto, the funds for pool-time rental could be reinvested in pool-operation by the TDSB.

This probably wouldn't save all the pools, but at least a couple dozen.

Plus, make better allowances for heritage buildings, and growing communities when funding square footage. This would really ease the burden on the TDSB.

Once that's done however; cap the % of budget that goes to administration; and cap the variances between the funding formula and what actually goes to each programming area; so that waste can be curtailed too.

That's just my 2 cents though, for what its worth.
 
I continue to wonder why the TDSB doesn't sell off some of its surplus real estate.

I think you've aimed at the nail, if you haven't hit it on the head. Not to get back on Mike Harris's back, but one of the chipmunks in faux rabbit fur he pulled out of his budgetary hat was selling off huge amounts of property owned by the province... the people, you and me. That looks just GREAT on your books for about 11 seconds. But once that money's spent, you still have the same budgetary problems and you're less the equity and utility of the property. Selling it's not the answer, unless you're a politician taking a swing at one last term before the indexed pension.

I think a better solution is to identify what the properties are, what they can be used for, and offering them for rent or lease for intelligent uses. They become perpetual money-generating engines for the province, they get maintained and used and contribute to the infrastructure (and thus, generate taxes as well), and eventually, they can be used for the TDSB's own needs if and when the need arises. But I'd resist the urge to just sell everything the last five or six generations worked to build up just so we can balance the books in this generation... briefly.
 
Lone Primate, I think that in theory your notion of better management and utilization of the public real estate portfolio is sound. I also agree that assets sales should not fund operating budgets. That said history suggests that public management is somewhat inept at managing real estate assets and negotiating contracts, perhaps because they are so beholden to political whim? Regardless, I am of the opinion that the public sector should try to concentrate more on doing fewer things well rather than all things badly and in this light rationalizing real estate assets, so long as the proceeds are used to address structural issues, can be a good thing.
 
Lone Primate, I think that in theory your notion of better management and utilization of the public real estate portfolio is sound. I also agree that assets sales should not fund operating budgets. That said history suggests that public management is somewhat inept at managing real estate assets and negotiating contracts, perhaps because they are so beholden to political whim? Regardless, I am of the opinion that the public sector should try to concentrate more on doing fewer things well rather than all things badly and in this light rationalizing real estate assets, so long as the proceeds are used to address structural issues, can be a good thing.

I don't think the school board itself should be doing the real estate handling. But there must be an office of management that handles this kind of thing (either on the civic or provincial level), and could do it for the TDSB as well, while the title to the property remains with the board. I think it's important that the board hang onto what it has, though, as equity, bargaining chips (this property for your business for that for our next suburban school, say), income, and expansion (schools, admin, what have you). If they sell the stuff off, the money will evaporate, but sooner or later they'll have to buy something again, and then they're borrowing. I don't think we should let old saws about the inefficiencies of government cause us to listen while the ghost of Mike Harris whispers in our ears.
 
From the Saturday Star:



Another Mike Harris legacy hits us. Other legacies: music programs, industrial arts, and home economics classes.

Maybe we should drop school buses and use that money for those programs. Children used to walk to school in the city of Toronto, when I went to school. But now you can't walk the 4 blocks because it's too far?

Who cares about home economics? That's the most useless course in school.
 

Back
Top