A series of proposed changes for Flin Flon schools, including shifts to which students would go to which schools, has been voted down by the Flin Flon School Division (FFSD) board.
The FFSD board of trustees held their final vote on the proposed changes March 9 after a public consultation process that included a pair of online town-hall meetings and an online survey.
Once the proposal went to a trustees’ vote, the result was a 5-2 decision, choosing not to pass the proposal as presented. Trustees Leslie Fernandes and Leslie Power voted for the decision, while trustees Jill Akkerman, Tim Davis, Amy Sapergia Green, Murray Skeavington and Ebony Trubiak voted against the proposal.
Under the proposal, Ecole McIsaac School and Ruth Betts Community School would have gone from being K-8 schools to each covering different groups of students - Kindergarten-Grade 4 students would only go to Ruth Betts, with Grades 5-8 students going only to Ecole McIsaac School. Other changes would include a shift of staff, removing four teacher positions and adding to the staff a dedicated mental health worker, a student support teacher and an educational assistant. The board estimated that enacting the changes would save the FFSD about $125,000, which could have then been reallocated to student supports.
No changes would have taken place for Hapnot Collegiate or Many Faces Education Centre under the proposal.
Before the vote, each trustee spoke about their concerns with the proposal, with many comments coming about the timing of the proposed changes. Several trustees made it clear that they did not disagree with the proposal itself, but rather the quick turnaround time for the changes it would put in place - if the proposal passed, the suggested changes would take place for the 2021/22 school year, less than six months from the day of the vote.
“We are still in the middle of a pandemic, which has caused stress, uncertainty and insecurity in pretty much everyone. This is a huge restructuring that I feel will throw even more of that on everyone,” said trustee Davis.
Trustee Akkerman also said she agreed with some proposed points, but that the timing was not right to enact such a proposal.
“With my decision comes weighing heavily the timing and our current climate. There has been so much change and so much uncertainty and the stress on the system, the parents, the guardians as well as the staff, there is a trickle down that may leave students feeling vulnerable,” she said.
While trustee Trubiak said she supported the changes in the proposal to promote inclusion and student supports, she could not vote for a proposal with such short turn-around.
“The decision was difficult and as of today, I still have some concerns with the plan to restructure as of September 2020. I believe we have not had enough time to adequately explore all the safety. concerns raised with this proposal,” she said.
Board chair Skeavington said he hadn’t made up his mind about his vote until earlier in the day, spending time weighing the pros and cons of approving the changes.
“As of 3 p.m, I still haven't made up my mind - I’ve been going back and forth. The more and more I think of it, the more and more I don't know if this is the right time to make this move,” he said.
“In saying that, I will be voting no on the proposal, but I would like to see us go back to the table and take a seriously look at this.”
Other trustees said they personally agreed with several changes but voted against the measures because of public pressure against the proposal.
“I honestly believe that, based on discussions with principals, second staff, senior admin and others, that this proposal is what is best for students in our division,” added trustee Sapergia Green.
“This plan does have some issues with busing and related to COVID-19 precautions that I genuinely believe could be solvable with staff and community buy in - but overall, I don't believe we have that buy in. I have been on this board working with and for my community for the last six years, but I underestimated the strain that everyone is under right now and what the effect of that strain would be. I overestimated the trust that this community and our staff have in this Flin Flon School Division.”
The pair of trustees who voted in favour of the decision each said they believed the proposed changes would be in the best interest of the FFSD’s students.
“I still don’t know what the right answer is, but I do know what the best answer is for me. I understand this restructure isn’t perfect, but for me, it’s the best way I can put our students’ needs first. That’s why I’m sitting in this chair - to put students first,” said Fernandes.
“I believe I have a duty to advocate for the fulfillment of these commitments to our community, giving students the opportunity for more resource time, increased mental wellness support, support in the classroom and an opportunity to address the racism in our community by creating inclusivity is the utmost importance to me,” said trustee Power.
“As a parent of students who are Indigenous have struggled academically and with their mental health, I want to be able to offer the most supports for my children and for yours.”
The online survey led to a deluge of negative comments toward both the new proposal and toward school division trustees themselves. Sapergia Green said she was disheartened by some feedback that included elements of racial and class discrimination against students and personal attacks against trustees.
“I honestly believed that because this board is filled with members of our community, your neighbors and friends, that people would believe that we were working from a place of good intentions. I was mistaken,” she said.
“We have heard from people who are fearful of change and the unknown, for people drowning and COVID-19-related stress and less often, but more upsetting, bigger issues in our community around class and race. None of these on their own are reasons to put aside a plan that I believe to be what is best for students, but taken together, I don't believe we're ready.”
Fernandes also said that the proposal led to large amounts of negative responses, including some that crossed a line for her.
“My decision will inevitably not make everybody happy. I know that. Here’s what I want you to know. You need to know that I read every comment or email that was sent to us - and not just the positive ones, those were easy to read. I read every single negative comment as well. They ranged from constructive to questioning to downright mean,” she said.
“I have been called irresponsible, idiotic and stupid. I have been accused of not caring. Don't accuse me of not caring. If you would have taken the time to learn who your school board trustees are, I would challenge you to find a person on this board that does not care.”
While the proposal was voted down, the changes are far from dead and buried. Following the decision, trustee Davis voted to take the proposal back to the division’s strategic planning committee to reexamine it, with trustee Sapergia Green adding a suggestion that the proposal is looked at again for the 2022/23 school year. All trustees voted in favour of sending the proposal back to committee.
