Newsletter Signup

Survey on potential Burlington school closures now active

Save Central School - Burlington

Have your say on the six options for potential closure of one or more Burlington high schools, or none, by filling out the online survey here: School Closure Survey

The six options have emerged for public input from the Program and Accommodation Review Committee of 14 parents, two from each of Burlington’s seven high schools. I am one of two parent representatives on the PARC representing Burlington Central High School.

The options include closing Central & Pearson; Bateman & Pearson; Bateman; Nelson; or no school closures. You can also have your say at two public meetings Feb. 28 and March 7.

For more information on the options, including links to Halton District School Board reports, visit my earlier article here: Four schools named in potential closure options


Receive new post notifications by email

7 thoughts on “Survey on potential Burlington school closures now active”

  1. I just tried to do the survey and it said that mobile was not supported and that I need to use a laptop or desk top (which I do not own) Thank you for alienating the younger demographic on this survey, I’m sure the results will be similarly skewed.

  2. I don’t understand how the board repeatedly considers it productive to suck so much time and effort from thousands of people when many of these options would not even be on the table, and a qualified team would make decisions in a reasonable world. Thinking of what else we could have accomplished as a community with all these meetings.

    1. I TOTALLY agree with you Corinne and brought that point up at a meeting last night. If they were trying to design a process that would have the most negative impact on a community, they’ve done a great job. They seriously need to be held accountable.

    2. Also why are they going after nelson and bateman… as well that makes no sense either. To be honest I think we need all of the schools because later down the road it will bite them in the ass and than what will happen than….

  3. I just completed the survey and found it a frustrating experience and unlikely to produce useful data. Many answers for me demanded qualifications which the format does not really allow for, though there is a general comment section for each option. Committe members with months of experience assessing and evaluating the implications of the proposed changes might be able to answer the questions without gross errors or self-contradiction, but any stakeholder member of the community who is not equally informed would need to spend days examining each option before committing to responses in order to avoid a set of head-scratching results (which I can’t imagine would occur anyway, with computer assembly of the responses). Add to that the questions raised by the community about the source data and I am extremely doubtful about the efficacy of the whole exercise and frankly suspicious of how it would be interpreted and used. I urge the board to take extensive public delegations and hold only public meetings with open, fulsome discussion and debate of the proposals, so that all points of view and the nuances of each choice are clear before a decision is made.

What's your take?

Here are guidelines before you comment, and our expectations before we will post:

  • Be civil. Would you speak this way to a good friend? If not, rewrite.
  • Focus on the issues. Build your argument and make your case in support of your opinion from facts, research or other sources. That way we can all learn. “I disagree with so-and-so because…” is fine; “So-and-so is naïve/stupid  for thinking the way he/she does and here’s why…” is not acceptable.
  • Don’t make personal attacks. Don’t assume motives of those you disagree with, make unfounded allegations, spread rumours, or engage in any other behaviours that would discourage you from participating if someone said this to, or about, you. The Golden Rule applies: Do unto others as you would have done to you. We will edit or not post comments with this type of content.
  • Say it once: When comments from the same individual or individuals become repetitive, going over ground already stated, we reserve the right to close commenting.
  • Use your full, and real, name. If wish to make a comment in public, we expect you will publicly stand behind it with your name. If you don’t want to publicly reveal your name, that’s fine; you are always welcome to share your thoughts with me privately via my email below. I welcome and consider all feedback in making decisions for the community.
  • Have fun, consider and learn. Share your views and read those of others. May we all benefit from a healthy exchange of ideas, and learn a little more about the people in our community, what you think, and what’s important to each of you. You may end up changing your mind about an issue; even if you don’t, we hope everyone will gain a greater understanding of why people have different perspectives.
Marianne Meed Ward

Marianne Meed Ward

A Better Burlington began in 2006 after my neighbours said they felt left out of city decisions, learning about them only after they’d been made. As journalist for 22 years, I thought “I can do something about that” and a website and newsletter were born. They’ve taken various forms and names over the years, but the intent remains: To let you know what’s happening at City Hall before decisions are made, so you can influence outcomes for A Better Burlington. The best decisions are made when elected representatives tap the wisdom of our community members, and welcome many different perspectives.This site allows residents to comment and debate with each other; our Commenting Guidelines established in 2016 aim to keep debate respectful. Got an idea or comment you want to share privately? Please, get in touch:

Newsletter Sign Up

Phone: 905-335-7607

Constituent Assistant: Hannelie van Niekerk
905-335-7600, ext. 7689