The school board’s response through a release from Director of Education Wayne Joudrie suggests it may be willing to do just that.

The board voted on July 2 to close Brantwood, Linbrook, Chisholm and New Central public schools and build a school in Clearview. The two remaining southeast Oakville schools, E. J. James and Maplegrove, would be renovated.

That decision was not the preferred option put forward by the Program and Accommodation and Review Committee, labelled PARC 14.

Former education minister Dave Cooke was appointed to create the report as a result of a petition received by the Ministry of Education in July 2008 asking for a review of the board’s decision.

In his report, Cooke said the PARC 14 process was flawed and recommended the board take another look at its options.

“I encourage the board, the petitioners and the Clearview community to step back and consider what could be done to lead to a consensus for both Clearview and southeast Oakville,” Cooke said. “This consensus must put the interest of students first.”

Cooke outlined in his report two suggestions on how to find a new solution.

“Perhaps a two-month process could be set up to explore solutions and work from the board’s goal of meeting the accommodation needs of students in both southeast Oakville and Clearview,” he wrote. “Another possible process would be a revised PARC, with shorter timelines and a focused mandate.”

Joudrie issued a response on Friday to the report, saying the board will consider future direction with respect to the southeast Oakville accommodation issue at a special board meeting scheduled for Wednesday, Dec. 10 at 7 p. m.

“As a board, we respect the conclusions David Cooke has outlined in his report, and thank him for such a thorough review and understanding of the accommodation pressures in this community,” said Joudrie in his release. “Throughout this complex PARC process, trustees and staff were focused on finding a good solution to support quality instructional environments for students. While the board’s decision in July was in the best interests of students, financially responsible and sustainable for the long-term, we recognize processes such as these always allow for improvement.”

This move is supported by Oakville Residents for Public Education (ORPE), the group that coordinated the request for an administrative review by the Province.

“The closure decision must be put on hold immediately,” said ORPE spokesperson Mark Caskenette, who added that the report is a relief for members of its organization. “If the process is flawed, then the decision is flawed; it is that simple. There is an opportunity now for the school board to conduct this process correctly by working with all the affected parties and finding a solution that respects the character and history of our community.”

Oakville MPP Kevin Flynn also supported Cooke’s findings. He praised the board in its efforts to find a solution to what he called a difficult challenge, but agreed that its decision should not stand.

“First and foremost, I think the school board should be congratulated for tackling the issue in the first place,” Flynn said.

“Trying to assess the proper school needs of a community isn’t going to win you any friends in a popularity contest…. What the review has said is that they could have done a better job at it. I don’t think that is anything to be ashamed of, but certainly it gives you a foundation to move forward.”

While Cooke recommended that the number of schools being closed be reviewed, he does agree with the decision that Clearview should get its own JK-8 school.

“The accommodation plan needs to reduce the excess pupil places in southeast Oakville,” he said in the report. “This means some schools need to be closed and the remaining schools renovated and modernized. Clearview students need accommodation in their own community. The plan should result in as few students being bussed as possible.”

Cooke’s endorsement of a new Clearview school was good news for parents in that community.

“We fervently agree with David Cooke’s assessment that Clearview should have a school within its own community,” said Michelle Sloane, president of Clearview Oakville Community Alliance (COCA), Clearview’s ratepayers association.

Sloane said COCA supports the board’s July 2 decision, but added that the board could work to find alternative solutions for the other schools in the area.

“I don’t believe there should be another PARC. I think that is a bit too detailed,” Sloane said. “The board needs to take a look at schools south of Cornwall and find a solution for those schools. Clearly it has been noted by Cooke that Clearview needs its own school and the board should continue with that, and now find a suitable solution for south of Cornwall, where all the discussions are coming from that they don’t like the solution.”

Cooke’s 15-page report makes several observations about what he considers to be a “flawed” accommodation review process.

One problem he identified was the number of members on PARC 14.

“The size of the PARC was unmanageable and the significant membership of school board staff was of concern to some of the parents,” he wrote.

Cooke also questioned the behaviour of trustees on the committee.

“The role of the trustees on the PARC was confusing,” wrote Cooke. “On one hand, there was an expectation that trustees should remain neutral, yet on the other hand their involvement was extensive.”

There were also critical comments made regarding the board’s decision to choose its own recommendation over the preferred option put forward by PARC 14.

“The decision making process followed by the board from April to July 2, 2008 was not transparent and it confused the community,” Cooke wrote. “I think everyone involved, the board, administration and the communities, would have to agree that the change from the first preferred option to the final decision was a complete surprise.”

Clearview parents disagree with Cooke’s criticism of PARC 14, saying that while the process was long, it was effective.

“Although we disagree that the HDSB violated its own accommodation policy, we agree with the principle of the report—that the community needs to come together and mend fences, while coming up with a workable solution for all parties,” said Sloane.

Cooke’s report is not binding, as the Ministry of Education has no authority to overturn school closure decisions or delay their implementation. The board will ultimately determine what happens next.

Caskenette said that ORPE is counting on Wednesday’s board meeting to open the door to new ideas and improved cooperation.

“I think that it will be the perfect opportunity for the school board to show its commitment to the community, its desire to mend fences and restore faith in public process,” he said,

Flynn is also hopeful that the board will take Cooke’s comments seriously and find a better solution to the accommodation issues facing southeast Oakville public schools.

“I think we can go back and achieve a solution that everyone is going to be happy with,” Flynn said. “The school board is very clear in saying that Clearview needs a new school, but the report says it could have done a better job to satisfy accommodation issues in southeast Oakville. I think they have the ability now to make some decisions that I’m hoping will allow most, if not all kids in southeast Oakville, to end up with a walk to school.”

He said reworking the issue will help to improve relations between parents who were divided over the issue.

“I can see a way, and I’m hopeful the school board can see a way too, of both communities getting what want, and that is the best for their kids,” said Flynn. “It’s a matter of healing and this provides a good vehicle to allow that healing to start.”